Strategy-specific effects: time affects self-repetitions and marginally clarification requests; proficiency pairing affects confirmation checks and negative feedback; language affects other-repetitions and negative feedback¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · associational r1–r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A significant time effect on self-repetitions shows higher percentages at Time 1 (M = 1.74) than Time 2 (M = 0.73), and only a marginal time effect on clarification requests (F(1, 72) = 3.847, p = .054). → Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester 2020 q3 i? Mixed dyads produce more confirmation checks (F(1, 72) = 7.960, p = .006) and more negative feedback (F(1, 72) = 5.086, p = .027) than matched dyads. → Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester 2020 (2) q3 i? Other-repetitions show a significant language effect (F(1, 72) = 26.423, p < .001), with more L2 (M = 2.25) than L1 (M = 0.26) other-repetitions, and negative feedback is higher in the L2 (M = 0.38) than the L1 (M = 0.05). → Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester 2020 (3)

Evidence¶

Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester 2020¶

Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester, Alexandra Vraciu. (2020). EFL child peer interaction: Measuring the effect of time, proficiency pairing and language of interaction. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(3), 449-472. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.3

q3 · i? · associational · r1

Mixed-model result for self-repetitions in the two-year dyad study; no interaction effects were found for this strategy. Clarification requests showed only a marginal time effect (p = .054), higher at Time 1.

"Regarding self-repetitions, a significant time effect was observed (F(1, 72) = 4.227, p = .043) since a higher percentage of self-repetitions was found at Time 1 (M = 1.74, SD = 2 . 8 6 ) t h an at T im e 2 (M = 0.73, SD = 1.45)."

Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester 2020 (2)¶

Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester, Alexandra Vraciu. (2020). EFL child peer interaction: Measuring the effect of time, proficiency pairing and language of interaction. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(3), 449-472. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.3

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Mixed-model results for confirmation checks and negative feedback; mixed dyads also produced more negative feedback (M = 0.39, SD = 1.00) than matched dyads (M = 0.03, SD = 0.22). A confirmation check × time interaction showed mixed dyads higher at Time 2.

"Confirmation checks showed a significant proficiency pairing effect ( F(1, 72) = 7.960, p = .006), irrespective of time and language, with mixed dyads producing higher percentages of confirmation checks ( M = 2.29, SD = 2 . 7 8 ) t h an matched dyads ( M = 0.88, SD = 1.53)."

Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester 2020 (3)¶

Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester, Alexandra Vraciu. (2020). EFL child peer interaction: Measuring the effect of time, proficiency pairing and language of interaction. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(3), 449-472. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.3

q3 · i? · associational · r1

Mixed-model results for other-repetitions and negative feedback; negative feedback was also higher in the L2 (M = 0.38, SD = 0.98) than the L1 (M = 0.05, SD = 0.32), with a significant language effect (F(1, 72) = 4.233, p = .043).

"Other-repetitions showed a significant language effect (F(1, 72) = 26.423,p < .001) with more L2 other repetitions (M = 2.25, SD = 2.39) than L1 other repetit i o n s (M = 0 . 2 6 ,SD = 0.64)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Clarification requests show a three-way interaction of proficiency pairing, time and language, declining over time only in matched dyads and in the L1 — related
• Within-language strategy profiles differ: other-repetition prevails in the L2 while clarification requests prevail in the L1, with negative feedback least used — related
• All meaning negotiation strategies appear in child EFL peer interaction except comprehension checks, which are absent — related
• Unfocused tasks elicit significantly more confirmation checks and clarification requests than focused tasks — related
• EFL proficiency significantly shapes chatbot interaction: high-proficiency learners over-engage in dialogue while low-proficiency learners over-rely on feedback requests — related
• Mixed proficiency dyads negotiate for meaning more than matched proficiency dyads, irrespective of time and language — related
• EFL primary children's meaning negotiation during a spot-the-differences task is low in amount but significantly higher in the L2 than in the L1 — related