Instruction on contrastive stress did not significantly improve fluency ratings of intermediate learners' spontaneous speech¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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? Fluency ratings for the experimental group showed no significant difference from pretest to posttest. → Levis and Levis 2018
Evidence¶
Levis and Levis 2018¶
John M. Levis & Greta Muller Levis. (2018). Teaching High-Value Pronunciation Features: Contrastive Stress for Intermediate Learners. The CATESOL Journal, 30(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1174193
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Same pretest-posttest rating study as the comprehensibility finding: 20 raters rated the same picture-comparison descriptions for fluency on a 9-point scale. The article reports no significant difference (z=.889, p=.374); combined means were 5.467 at pretest and 5.653 at posttest, described as very close.
"Table 2 shows the means and standard deviations for the pretest and posttest, but we did not find a significant difference in fluency ratings for the experimental group (z=.889, p=.374)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Instruction on contrastive stress significantly improves rated comprehensibility of intermediate ESL learners' spontaneous picture-comparison speech — related
- Control group participants who completed the posttest showed little change in comprehensibility or fluency ratings — related
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.