Claims

Experimental-group EFL students taught with working memory strategies significantly outperformed control-group students on a vocabulary post-test

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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.

q2 i? After a 10-week intervention with working memory strategies, the experimental group (M = 3.46, SD = 0.99) scored significantly higher than the control group (M = 2.5, SD = 1.336) on the post-test, t(48) = -2.9, p = 0.005. → Ibarra Santacruz 2018

Evidence

Ibarra Santacruz 2018

Ibarra Santacruz, D., & Martínez Ortega, D. (2018). Can working memory strategies enhance English vocabulary learning? HOW, 25(2), 29-47. https://doi.org/10.19183/how.25.2.410

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental study of two intact undergraduate EFL groups (28 experimental, 22 control) at a Colombian university; performance coded on a 4-point scale and compared with independent-samples t-tests. The article reports the experimental group "outperformed the control group" with t(48) = -2.9, p = 0.005.

"The results of an independent-samples t-test (Table 4) demonstrated that the experimental group ( M = 3.46, SD = 0.99) outperformed the control group ( M = 2.5, SD = 1.336), t(48) = -2.9, p = 0.005 in the post-test."

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.