Claims

The authors judge the one-month treatment duration insufficient for developing judge-rated L2 pronunciation, and impressionistic ratings a possible reason for the null fluency result

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q1
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.

q1 i? The authors interpret the null results as possibly due to the brevity of the one month treatment and the nature of impressionistic judge ratings. → Cardoso 2017

Evidence

Cardoso 2017

Cardoso, W., Rueb, A., & Grimshaw, J. (2017). Can an interactive digital game help French learners improve their pronunciation? In K. Borthwick, L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (Eds), CALL in a climate of change: adapting to turbulent global conditions – short papers from EUROCALL 2017 (pp. 67-72). Research-publishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2017.eurocall2017.691

q1 · i? · causal · r1

Authors' interpretation offered in the discussion, not a tested result: they also suggest "the non-significance observed might be due to the nature of the impressionistic measures adopted, based merely on judges' ratings". No data test these explanations.

"It is possible that these results are due to the brevity of the one month treatment, which seems insufficient for the development of the three aspects of pronunciation in this study."

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.