Experimental and control groups were equivalent in vocabulary before the glossing treatment¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q3
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.
q3 i? A Mann-Whitney U-test of pretest scores found no significant difference between the groups, confirming equivalence. → Samah Zakareya Ahmad 2019
Evidence¶
Samah Zakareya Ahmad 2019¶
Samah Zakareya Ahmad. (2019). Multimedia Glosses for Enhancing EFL Students' Vocabulary Acquisition and Retention. English Language Teaching, 12(12). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n12p46
q3 · i? · causal · r1
Pretest administration of the researcher-devised 50-item vocabulary test to both groups before treatment; Table 1 reports Sig. 0.733. The analysis "did not indicate a significant difference between the mean scores of the two groups (U= 238; p>0.05)"; equivalence was not further tested.
"Mann-Whitney U-test analysis of pretest data did not indicate a significant difference between the mean scores of the two groups (U= 238; p>0.05). This confirmed that the two groups were equivalent."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The three treatment groups were equivalent in reading comprehension at pretest — related
- The four DA-by-age groups were statistically equivalent in general English proficiency and pre-test writing accuracy before treatment — 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
- Experimental and control groups showed no significant pre-test difference in reading comprehension before treatment — related
- Baseline pre-assessment scores showed no statistical differences between treatment and control groups in either the matched or baseline sample. — related
- The online vocabulary intervention did not significantly improve reading comprehension — related
- Background measures show no group differences in age, intelligence, or English vocabulary, confirming group matching — related
- Before the training, experimental and control PESTs were largely equivalent in argumentative competence, except justifications in the tree growth activity where the control group scored lower — related
- No significant pre-test difference existed between the two groups' entry listening knowledge — related
- Multimedia glosses improve EFL students' vocabulary retention two weeks after treatment relative to no glosses — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
gloss-study-groups-equivalent-at-pretest |
title |
Experimental and control groups were equivalent in vocabulary before the glossing treatment |
description |
Experimental and control groups were equivalent in vocabulary before the glossing treatment |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2019 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-09-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — samah-zakareya-ahmad-2019 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.