A majority of CMC studies (79%) produced effect sizes favoring CMC, while 21% favored face-to-face or non-computer-mediated communication¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Of 56 study-weighted effect sizes, 79% (44 studies) were positive and favored CMC integration and 21% (12 studies) were negative and favored face-to-face or communication without computer-mediated devices. → Lin 2012

Evidence¶

Lin 2012¶

Lin, H. (2012). The Effectiveness of Computer-Mediated Communication on SLA: A Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis. In L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (Eds.), CALL: Using, Learning, Knowing, EUROCALL Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, Proceedings. Research-publishing.net. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED574920

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r1

Results section of the meta-analysis reporting the direction distribution across the 56 included studies: "79% (44 studies) of the study-weighted effect sizes were positive and favored CMC integration". Percentages only; no standardized effect size is printed for this contrast.

"The results showed that of the 56 studies included, 79% (44 studies) of the study-weighted effect sizes were positive and favored CMC integration, while 21% (12 studies) of them were negative and favored face-to-face or communication without any computer-mediated devices."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• CMC integration yields an overall small-to-medium positive effect (d = .554) on L2 learning outcomes compared with face-to-face communication — related
• Small group sizes produced the largest CMC effect compared with no grouping or groups of more than 3 students — related
• Moderation of synchronous computer-mediated interaction differs from face-to-face or asynchronous moderation — related
• Learning happens across formal, non-formal and informal settings, face-to-face and online — a broader claim this one bears on
• SCMC interaction shows a small, non-significant advantage over FTF on overall L2 learning outcomes — related