Only the Standard two-week-interval treatment showed a statistically significant improvement over the Baseline treatment¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In a fixed-effects generalized linear model, the Standard treatment (two weeks between each distillation) differed significantly from the Baseline treatment, while Frontloaded and Mixed did not reach significance. → John Duplice 2022

Evidence¶

John Duplice 2022¶

John Duplice. (2022). The GoldList Notebook Method: A Study on L2 Vocabulary Learning. IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education, Volume 10 – Issue 1. https://iafor.org/journal/iafor-journal-of-education/ doi:10.22492/ije.10.1.05

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Generalized linear model with fixed effects in R 4.0.3, pre-test as baseline score and Baseline treatment as baseline condition, on idiom-matching correctness for 74 participants. Only the Standard treatment reached significance (t = 2.457, p = .0143); no effect size was printed.

"Comparing other treatments to the Baseline, the model showed significant interaction of the Standard treatment (t = 2.457, p = .0143)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Total retrieval spacing improved one-week vocabulary recall while relative schedules were not distinguished — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Classroom implementation of the GoldList Method encountered pitfalls: forgotten notebooks, omitted dates, and unclear initial steps — related
• The GoldList Notebook Method increases long-term retention of L2 idioms compared with a vocabulary lesson alone — related
• Uniform two-week spacing between distillations yielded the greatest benefit among the tested schedules, ranking Standard, Mixed, Frontloaded, then Baseline — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)