Claims

Learners hold positive attitudes toward glosses, but their perceptions of which gloss type works best do not match measured performance

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2009 · 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? 75% of experimental-group subjects said glosses were helpful for comprehension and vocabulary learning, yet subjects' perceptions of the most helpful gloss type did not match the test results. → Cheng 2009

Evidence

Cheng 2009

Cheng, Y.-H., & Good, R. L. (2009). L1 glosses: Effects on EFL learners’ reading comprehension and vocabulary retention. Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(2), 119–142. doi:10.64152/10125/66828

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive questionnaire (24 items, in Chinese) administered to all subjects after the posttest. Item 6: 42% thought L1-gloss-L2-ex best for learning words, but in-text glosses scored slightly higher (M = 8.68 vs 8.53, not significant); the authors conclude perceptions do not match performance.

"the results for both items showed that 75% of subjects in the experimental groups responded positively saying vocabulary glosses were helpful for text comprehension and vocabulary learning during the study"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id gloss-perceptions-mismatch-performance
title Learners hold positive attitudes toward glosses, but their perceptions of which gloss type works best do not match measured performance
description Learners hold positive attitudes toward glosses, but their perceptions of which gloss type works best do not match measured performance
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2009
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-09-27
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — cheng-2009

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