Both feedback conditions outperformed the no-feedback control group on grammar posttest scores¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · 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 analogy-based CF group scored significantly higher than the control group (mean difference 2.933, p = .000), and the metalinguistic group scored significantly higher than the control group (mean difference 1.733, p = .000). → Masjedi 2019
Evidence¶
Masjedi 2019¶
Masjedi, H., & Tabatabaei, S. P. (2019). Analogy-based CF or Metalinguistic Feedback: Which One Is Better in EFL Classrooms? International Journal of Instruction, 12(3), 513-528. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12331a
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Post hoc comparisons in the same quasi-experiment: Table 9 prints analogy-based vs control mean difference 2.933* (Sig. .000) and metalinguistic vs control 1.733* (Sig. .000), each significant at the 0.05 level, with 15 learners per group.
"The results in Table 9 show that there were significant differences among the mean scores of the control group and the other two groups."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Analogy-based corrective feedback produced higher grammar posttest scores than metalinguistic feedback among young elementary EFL learners — related
- Posttest grammar scores differed significantly among the three feedback groups (omnibus ANOVA) — related
- All four written CF types, including metalinguistic code CF, outperformed the control group on the delayed posttest of explicit L2 knowledge two weeks later. — related
- On the immediate posttest of explicit L2 knowledge, direct CF and metalinguistic CF with rule explanations outperformed the control group while metalinguistic code CF did not. — related
- All four written CF types, including metalinguistic code CF, outperformed the control group on the delayed posttest of implicit L2 knowledge. — related
- On the immediate posttest of implicit L2 knowledge, direct CF and metalinguistic CF with rule explanations outperformed the control group while metalinguistic code CF did not. — related
- Corrective feedback on second-language errors has a significant effect on L2 development that is maintained on delayed tests — a broader claim this one bears on
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.