The treatment and control groups had equivalent vocabulary sizes at pre-test¶

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¶

q2 i? An Independent Samples t-Test found no significant difference between the groups' pre-test scores, supporting their comparability. → Altay 2017

Evidence¶

Altay 2017¶

Mehmet ALTAY. (2017). Raising Awareness of Lexical Semantic Relations in Undergraduate EFL Context. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 11(1), 42-52. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1167230

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Independent Samples t-Test on pre-test Vocabulary Size Test scores of the 20-student treatment group (mean 5380.000) and 20-student control group (mean 5510.000), reported in Table 4 after normality and Levene's checks. The article reports "no significant difference between the pre-test scores".

"there was no significant difference between the pre-test scores of the test-taker groups (t38 = -,514, p ≥ ,05)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Before instruction, the experimental and control groups showed no statistically significant difference in vocabulary knowledge — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• The control and experimental groups showed no significant difference in vocabulary knowledge at pre-test — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Before treatment, the experimental and control groups showed no significant difference in overall language proficiency — related
• Experimental and control groups were homogeneous in idiom knowledge before treatment — related
• Chatbot and search engine classes showed no significant baseline differences in science learning ability and knowledge before the intervention — related
• The two groups did not differ significantly in writing quality before the treatment — related
• The experimental and control classes did not differ significantly on the listening pre-test — related
• The two groups did not differ significantly in listening ability at pretest, supporting group homogeneity — related
• Pre-treatment reading comprehension of the two groups was statistically equivalent (Levene sig. 0.247; F = 3.959, sig. 0.051) — related
• Before the treatment, the experimental and control groups showed no statistically significant difference in conceptual fluency on the idiom pre-test — related
• Before treatment, experimental and control groups did not differ significantly in Willingness to Communicate — related
• Experimental and control groups showed no significant difference in pre-test vocabulary scores, supporting group equivalence at baseline — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)