Claims

The dictogloss and dicto-phrase groups showed no significant difference in language proficiency before treatment

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2013 · 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.

q3 i? An independent samples t-test on the piloted KET proficiency test found no significant difference between the two groups at the outset (t = 0.217, p = 0.829). → Hamid Marashi 2013

Evidence

Hamid Marashi 2013

Hamid Marashi, Mojgan Khaksar. (2013). Dictogloss or Dicto-Phrase: Which Works Better for Listening Comprehension? li-manager's Journal of English Language Teaching, Vol. 3 No. 1, January-March. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1068862

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Homogeneity check on the piloted mock KET proficiency test prior to treatment; pretest means were 70.53 (dictogloss) and 70.18 (dicto-phrase). The article reports "no significant difference between the mean scores of the two groups at the outset"; equivalence was not formally tested beyond this t-test.

"The results (t = 0.217, p = 0.829 > 0.05) indicate that there was no significant difference between the mean scores of the two groups at the outset."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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