Treatment and control groups' WAT means differed by about 14 points (98.05 vs 83.95) with nearly equal standard deviations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Descriptive statistics show treatment mean 98.05 versus control mean 83.95 on the WAT, with similar standard deviations (13.828 and 13.748). → Jafarpour 2014

Evidence¶

Jafarpour 2014¶

Mohsen Jafarpour. (2014). The Effect of Incorporating the Extensive Reading Approach into Vocabulary Instruction on Learners' Lexical Depth in an EFL Context. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.3p.162

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive statistics (Table 1) for the 20-student control and 20-student treatment groups' WAT scores; the article reports means of "83.95 and 98.05" and near-identical SDs, with no significant skewness or kurtosis.

"In control and treatment groups, the means on WAT scores are 83.95 and 98.05, respectively. Similar differences in minimum, maximum, and sum scores were also found. The standard deviation (SD) is almost the same (13.748 and 13.829)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Vocabulary — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Incorporating the extensive reading approach into vocabulary instruction significantly improves high-intermediate EFL learners' lexical depth — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)