Claims

Receptive word comprehension improved for both dictionary and non-dictionary words, with no receptive-level difference between the two word types

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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? No difference in the receptive level was found between dictionary and non-dictionary words; children could identify word meanings from pictures after story exposure alone. → Korat et al. 2017

Evidence

Korat et al. 2017

Korat, O., Kozlov-Peretz, O., & Segal-Drori, O. (2017). Repeated E-book Reading and Its Contribution to Learning New Words among Kindergartners. Journal of Education and Training Studies, Vol. 5, No. 7. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i7.2498

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Discussion of the randomized e-book study's word-type ANCOVA results for receptive comprehension. The article states the null contrast was not accompanied by evidence of equivalence, and that repeated exposure to a new word in context may lead to significant learning.

"No difference in the receptive level was found between dictionary and non-dictionary words. The findings show that identifying words' meaning by pictures was possible when the children were exposed to the story without the dictionary."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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