Claims

Feedback effects on ungrammatical GJT items were weak because learners already possessed the relevant explicit knowledge

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2006 · 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.

q3 i? There were no group differences on ungrammatical grammaticality judgment items at either posttest, which the authors attribute to learners' high pretest explicit knowledge of the structure. → Rod Ellis 2006

Evidence

Rod Ellis 2006

Rod Ellis, Shawn Loewen and Rosemary Erlam. (2006). Implicit and Explicit Corrective Feedback and the Acquisition of L2 Grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Volume 28, Issue 2. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060141

q3 · i? · causal · r1

ANCOVA on ungrammatical GJT items at delayed posttest, n = 34; "no differences on the delayed posttest for the ungrammatical items, F (2, 34) = 0.900, p = .417". The authors attribute this to near-ceiling pretest explicit knowledge.

"there were no differences on the delayed posttest for the ungrammatical items, F (2, 34) = 0.900, p = .417."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id weak-effect-ungrammatical-gjt-items-ceiling
title Feedback effects on ungrammatical GJT items were weak because learners already possessed the relevant explicit knowledge
description Feedback effects on ungrammatical GJT items were weak because learners already possessed the relevant explicit knowledge
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2006
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — rod-ellis-2006

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