Claims

Experimental-group mean prosodic scores rose from 58.2 to 70.6 while control-group means rose only from 59.85 to 61.1

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · 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? The experimental group's total mean rose from 58.2 (SD = 6.46) at pre-test to 70.6 (SD = 12.78) at post-test. → Namaziandost 2018

Evidence

Namaziandost 2018

Namaziandost, E., Esfahani, F. R., & Hashemifarnia, A. (2018). The Impact of Using Authentic Videos on Prosodic Ability among Foreign Language Learners. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 375-390. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1191678

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive statistics from Tables 5 and 7: experimental post-test mean 70.6000 (SD 12.78321) versus control post-test mean 61.1000 (SD 11.25260); control pre-test mean 59.8500. The article says the group "developed significantly due to the new experience of teaching".

"Table 5 illustrates that the prosodic ability of the experimental group developed significantly due to the new experience of teaching, where the mean score of the total in the pre-test equals (mean 58.2 with SD= 6.46), whereas the mean was 70.6 with =12.78 on the post-test."

Discussion

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.