{
  "original_study": {
    "claim": {
      "hypothesis": "The interaction of the use of memorization and school-average ability will be negatively related to mathematics self-concept",
      "hypothesis_location": "Page 12 (Hypotheses and Research Questions Addressed\nby the Present Investigation) Hypothesis 6",
      "statement": "The study finds that the Memorization × School-Average Mathematics Ability interaction is statistically significant and negative (b = -0.089), indicating that students who use memorization more experience a stronger negative effect of high school-average ability on mathematical self-concept.",
      "statement_location": "Table 3 (page 21), row 'School-Average Ability × Moderator' under Memorization (value = -0.089), and text on p. 20 (Study Methods: Cognitive and Metacognitive Learning Strategies) stating it had a 'statistically significant negative association.'",
      "study_type": "Observational"
    },

    "data": {
      "source": "Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2003 dataset.",
      "wave_or_subset": "PISA 2003 mathematics assessment sample.",
      "sample_size": "265,180 students who attended 10,221 schools in 41 countries.",
      "unit_of_analysis": "Individual student (nested within schools and countries in a multilevel model).",
      "access_details": "not stated",
      "notes": "Analyses include students with non-missing data for mathematical self-concept, memorization strategy use, individual mathematics ability, and school-average mathematics ability."
    },

    "method": {
      "description": "The authors used multilevel modeling to test whether memorization strategy use moderates the big-fish–little-pond effect (the negative association between school-average mathematics ability and mathematical self-concept).",
      "steps": [
        "Identify students with complete data on mathematical self-concept, memorization strategy use, individual ability, and school-average mathematics ability.",
        "Compute school-average mathematics ability for each school based on aggregated achievement scores.",
        "Specify a multilevel model with students nested within schools and countries.",
        "Include memorization as a student-level predictor and school-average ability as a school-level predictor.",
        "Add the Memorization × School-Average Ability interaction term to test moderation.",
        "Estimate the model and interpret the interaction coefficient from Table 3."
      ],
      "models": "Multilevel linear regression (three-level hierarchical model with students nested within schools nested within countries).",
      "outcome_variable": "Mathematical self-concept.",
      "independent_variables": "Memorization strategy use, School-average mathematics ability, Memorization × School-Average Ability interaction.",
      "control_variables": "Individual mathematics ability; intrinsic motivation; instrumental motivation; self-efficacy; elaboration; control strategies; anxiety; competitiveness; cooperativeness; sense of belonging; teacher–student relations; gender; family SES; school-average SES; and country-level effects (three-level model structure).",
      "tools_software": "not stated"
    },

    "results": {
      "summary": "The Memorization × School-Average Ability interaction is statistically significant and negative, indicating that memorization strengthens the negative association between attending a high-ability school and mathematical self-concept.",
      "numerical_results": [
        {
          "outcome_name": "Mathematical self-concept (interaction effect of Memorization × School-Average Mathematics Ability)",
          "value": -0.089,
          "unit": "unstandardized regression coefficient",
          "effect_size": "-0.157",
          "confidence_interval": {
            "lower": "not stated",
            "upper": "not stated",
            "level": "not stated"
          },
          "p_value": "p < .001",
          "statistical_significance": 1,
          "direction": "negative"
        }
      ]
    },

    "metadata": {
      "original_paper_id": "10.3102/0002831209350493",
      "original_paper_title": "Big-Fish–Little-Pond Effect: Generalizability and Moderation—Two Sides of the Same Coin",
      "original_paper_code": "not stated",
      "original_paper_data": "not stated"
    }
  }
}