Claims

Both strategies produced gains in vocabulary knowledge over the course of the treatment

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? The article concludes that learners' vocabulary knowledge improved during the course under both treatments. → Masoudi 2017

Evidence

Masoudi 2017

Golfam Masoudi. (2017). The Effect of Vocabulary Self-Selection Strategy and Input Enhancement Strategy on the Vocabulary Knowledge of Iranian EFL Learners. English Language Teaching, 10(8). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n8p32

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Conclusion drawn from comparing pretest, seen posttest and unseen posttest scores of the two experimental groups of 40 pre-intermediate Iranian girls aged 14-16 treated from February to April 2014. The Input Enhancement group moved from 33% to 68% and 69% correct on the seen and unseen posttests.

"The statistical analysis indicated that the learners’ vocabulary knowledge had improved during the course as the result of the treatment they received."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.