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 · causalr2·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¶
Related Claims¶
- Earlier meta-analyses, as reported second-hand, find that glosses improve L2 vocabulary learning and that text-and-picture glosses outperform single-mode glosses — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- Students and teachers respond favorably to embedded aids: approximately 90% of students reported no difficulty understanding or using the aids, and over 75% wanted similar aids throughout the book. — related
- L1 glosses do not significantly improve EFL reading comprehension compared with no glosses — related
- Multimedia glosses improve EFL students' immediate vocabulary acquisition relative to reading the same texts without glosses — related
- Learners showed positive attitudes toward receiving SMS vocabulary messages, and instant messaging raised intercultural awareness — related
- Adolescent EFL learners perceive cartoon-based pictorial elucidation as helpful for accurate vocabulary use and engagement — related
- A multiple-choice gloss format (L1 + L2) produced significantly higher vocabulary posttest scores than a single-gloss format in Nagata's Japanese study — related
- Questionnaire data may capture learners' perceptions rather than the strategies they actually performed — a broader claim this one bears on
- Only L1-gloss-L2-ex and L1-in-text-gloss conditions significantly outperform the no-gloss control on all three vocabulary recall tests — related
- All three L1 gloss conditions significantly improve immediate vocabulary recall over a no-gloss control in EFL reading — related
- Textual material treated with embedded aids produced 10-15% higher reading comprehension scores than conventional text, statistically significant at the .01 level, in a science-material study with approximately 200 tenth graders across three schools. — related
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.