Both learner groups were more successful on listening tasks requiring local understanding than on tasks requiring integration of information or inference¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on a source with no registered publication record (a web page, book or unpublished report). It is kept because a design page cites it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.
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? Both HLLs and NHLLs achieved higher percentages correct on local-understanding questions than on integration or inference questions, with the latter two demands posing similar challenges to both groups. → Denise Santos & Gláucia Silva 2015
Evidence¶
Denise Santos & Gláucia Silva 2015¶
Denise Santos & Gláucia Silva. (2015). Exploring Portuguese Heritage and Non-Heritage Learners' Perceptions of and Performance in Listening. The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 18(1), 63-86. https://journals.sfu.ca/cjal/index.php/cjal
q2 · i? · associational · r1
Descriptive statistics per task demand (Table 2): local understanding means were 96.3 (HLLs) and 93.4 (NHLLs), versus 75/68.2 for integration and 78.3/63.2 for inference. Questions were coded using Graham et al.'s (2008) system with 70% inter-rater agreement.
"Our data also suggest that both groups of learners were more successful in tasks involving local understanding than in those requiring inference or the understanding and integration of information."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Heritage learners scored only slightly higher than non-heritage learners on listening tasks, with no statistically significant group difference — related
- Heritage learners showed broader attention to the passage and selective second-listening attention, while non-heritage learners focused on local information — related
- Successful and unsuccessful listening performance in this study is associated with learners' strategic behaviour rather than with heritage or non-heritage status — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
local-understanding-easier-than-integration-inference |
title |
Both learner groups were more successful on listening tasks requiring local understanding than on tasks requiring integration of information or inference |
description |
Both learner groups were more successful on listening tasks requiring local understanding than on tasks requiring integration of information or inference |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2015 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-09-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — denise-santos-gláucia-silva-2015 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.