Open Access

Doris Holzberger, Anika Radkowitsch, Nicole Heitzmann, Michael Nickl, Laura Brandl, Matthias Stadler, Andreas Obersteiner, Olga Chernikova, Amadeus Jonathan Pickal, Constanze Richters, Stephanie Kron, Christof Wecker, Marie Irmer, Caroline Corves, Birgit Jana Neuhaus, Martin R. Fischer, Stefan Ufer, Frank Fischer, Tina Seidel, Daniel Sommerhoff

• This study, conducted as a registered report, investigates how expectancy beliefs and task values predict diagnostic performance in simulation-based learning environments for prospective teachers and physicians. Using a meta-analytic approach, we analyzed individual participant data from 16 studies (N = 1,492) conducted within a single research unit. Despite the homogeneity in measures and methodologies, measurement invariance analyses revealed two clusters of studies (Cluster 1: nine studies, Cluster 2: five studies) with differing patterns. For expectancies for success and diagnostic accuracy, the aggregated Fisher’s z correlation was .07 (p = .03, 95% CI [.01, .13]) in Cluster 1 and −.04 (p = .63, 95% CI [−.18, .11]) in Cluster 2. For utility value and diagnostic accuracy, the correlations were .14 (p < .05; 95% CI [.02, .26]) and .08 (p = .10; 95% CI [−.01, .18]), respectively. The interaction between expectancy beliefs and utility value showed weak, inconsistent, andThis study, conducted as a registered report, investigates how expectancy beliefs and task values predict diagnostic performance in simulation-based learning environments for prospective teachers and physicians. Using a meta-analytic approach, we analyzed individual participant data from 16 studies (N = 1,492) conducted within a single research unit. Despite the homogeneity in measures and methodologies, measurement invariance analyses revealed two clusters of studies (Cluster 1: nine studies, Cluster 2: five studies) with differing patterns. For expectancies for success and diagnostic accuracy, the aggregated Fisher’s z correlation was .07 (p = .03, 95% CI [.01, .13]) in Cluster 1 and −.04 (p = .63, 95% CI [−.18, .11]) in Cluster 2. For utility value and diagnostic accuracy, the correlations were .14 (p < .05; 95% CI [.02, .26]) and .08 (p = .10; 95% CI [−.01, .18]), respectively. The interaction between expectancy beliefs and utility value showed weak, inconsistent, and nonsignificant relations with diagnostic accuracy in both clusters. Findings also varied depending on whether motivational variables were assessed at a task-specific or more general level. No differences emerged between teacher and medical education contexts. These findings highlight the context-dependency of motivational processes and suggest that variations may stem from the situated nature of learning environments and how constructs are operationalized. The results also emphasize the need to tailor interventions to specific learning contexts and caution against generalizing from single studies. Overall, our study underscores the situated nature of expectancy–value frameworks and the importance of multistudy syntheses in understanding their role in professional education.…