Metalinguistic written CF was equivalent, not superior, to non-metalinguistic direct CF, contrasting with previous studies whose metalinguistic CF also contained correct forms.¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2020 · 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? In this study, where metalinguistic CF contained no correct forms, its beneficial effects were equivalent to those of direct CF, contradicting prior findings of metalinguistic CF superiority. → Jang 2020
Evidence¶
Jang 2020¶
Jang, Sung-Soo. (2020). The efficacy of different types of metalinguistic information in L2 written corrective feedback. English Teaching, 75(4), 33-56. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.75.4.202012.33
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Authors' comparison of the present experiment's posttest results with prior metalinguistic CF research, reported in the Discussion. The study notes "the beneficial effects of metalinguistic CF were not greater but equivalent to those of DR"; no effect size is printed for this equivalence contrast.
"the beneficial effects of metalinguistic CF were not greater but equivalent to those of DR, which contrasts with previous studies showing the superiority of metalinguistic CF."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- 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
- 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
- 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
- All four written CF types, including metalinguistic code CF, outperformed the control group on the delayed posttest of implicit L2 knowledge. — related
- Corrective feedback facilitates L2 grammatical development, with explicit feedback stronger immediately and implicit feedback better maintained over time — a broader claim this one bears on
- Theoretical perspectives support corrective feedback while contentious issues remain about uptake, instruction, and CF's purpose — related
- Explicit instruction facilitates the acquisition of L2 grammar — 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 |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
metalinguistic-cf-equivalent-not-superior-to-direct |
title |
Metalinguistic written CF was equivalent, not superior, to non-metalinguistic direct CF, contrasting with previous studies whose metalinguistic CF also contained correct forms. |
description |
Metalinguistic written CF was equivalent, not superior, to non-metalinguistic direct CF, contrasting with previous studies whose metalinguistic CF also contained correct forms. |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2020 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — jang-2020 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.