Claims

The mock-test and conventional-instruction groups did not differ significantly on the pretest before the intervention

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · 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? Pretest comparison showed no significant difference between groups (t(49)=-4.87, p=.12), supporting group comparability at baseline. → Khodabakhshzadeh et al. 2017

Evidence

Khodabakhshzadeh et al. 2017

Hossein Khodabakhshzadeh, Reza Zardkanloo, Iman Alipoor. (2017). The Effect of Mock Tests on Iranian EFL learners’ Test Scores. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies 5(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.5n.3p.47

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Baseline homogeneity check in the quasi-experiment: pretest scores of Group 1 (M=20.11, SD=2.898) and Group 2 (M=20.45, SD=3.011) compared via independent samples t-test; the article reports "non-significant difference between the groups was assumed." Equivalence was not formally tested beyond this comparison.

"As shown in Table 3, (t(49)=-4.87, p=.12 ≥ α= 0.05); therefore non-significant difference between the groups was assumed. In addition, the difference between Group 1 (M= 20.11, SD= 2.898) and Group 2 (M=20.45, SD=3.011) is not significant."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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