After PCR instruction, apology WDCT scores improved significantly on some criteria but not on politeness in either scenario¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In Apology 1, pre-post differences were significant for correct expressions, quality of information, and strategy choices (p < .05) but not politeness; in Apology 2, only correct expressions and strategy choices were significant. → Noonkong et al. 2017

Evidence¶

Noonkong et al. 2017¶

Uraiwan Rattanapan Noonkong, Anamai Damnet, Kanjana Charttrakul. (2017). Enhancing Thai Engineering Students’ Complaints and Apologies through Pragmatic Consciousness-Raising Approach (PCR). Advances in Language and Literary Studies. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.8n.6p.92

q2 · i? · design · r2

Paired-samples t-test analysis of apology WDCT scenarios (Table 2) in the same 45-student action research study; the quote names the three significant criteria and the null result for politeness, and the article adds no significant difference for quality of information in Apology 2.

"Regarding the first scenario, the mean scores in the pre-test and posttest were significantly different in three areas; “correct expressions,” “quality of information,” and “strategy choices” (p value <.05) with no significant difference in “politeness.”"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Twelve sessions of PCR instruction significantly improved Thai engineering students' WDCT performance on complaints across all four criteria in both scenarios — related
• Participants raised three concerns about the PCR class: low confidence to use learned expressions in real communication, insufficient grammar development, and doubts about roleplay tests — related
• Participants perceived the PCR class as beneficial in four areas: awareness of social factors, indirect strategies, nonverbal communication, and a motivating atmosphere — related