Pretest scores significantly predict posttest scores across CF types and outcome measures¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In the regression models, pretest scores were generally a significant predictor of posttest scores irrespective of CF type or outcome measure. → Yusuke Sato 2023

Evidence¶

Yusuke Sato 2023¶

Yusuke Sato. (2023). Interactions Among Declarative and Procedural Memory Systems, Different Linguistic Structures, and the Efficacy of Different Corrective Feedback Types. Journal for the Psychology of Language Learning, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.52598/jpll/5/1/4

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Secondary finding from the multiple regression analyses for both regular and irregular past tense: pretest scores on the GJT or EIT were included as covariates and were generally significant predictors, which the article notes is "in line with previous studies."

"In general, pretest scores were significantly related to posttest scores irrespective of the CF type or L2 outcome measure, in line with previous studies"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Prior Knowledge — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Prior Knowledge Determines New Learning — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Procedural memory predicts immediate regular-past-tense UGJT posttest scores, controlling for pretest, only under metalinguistic prompts — related
• Procedural memory shows no association with irregular past tense learning under any CF type — related
• Declarative memory predicts immediate UGJT posttest gains for irregular past tense only under recasts — related
• Declarative memory shows no association with regular past tense learning under any CF type — related
• CF treatment improved regular past tense performance on both GJT and EIT with large effects — related
• Learners in all three corrective-feedback groups improve irregular past tense performance on both GJT and EIT from pretest to posttests, a within-group gain that does not separate the feedback types — related
• Feedback effects on ungrammatical GJT items were weak because learners already possessed the relevant explicit knowledge — related
• Knowledge-test scores correlated significantly with the self-assessed knowledge item at both pretest and posttest — related
• No group differences on immediate posttests for either feedback type on either measure — related