Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 719

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately

Truscott, John·2007·Journal of Second Language Writing
DOI 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. Adams, 2003, L2 output, reformulation and noticing: Implications for IL development, Language Teaching Research, 7, 347, 10.1191/1362168803lr127oa · DOI
  2. Ashwell, 2000, Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method?, Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 227, 10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Bitchener, 2005, The effect of different types of feedback on ESL student writing, Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 191, 10.1016/j.jslw.2005.08.001 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Chandler, 2003, The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing, Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267, 10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Chandler, 2004, A response to Truscott, Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 345, 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.05.001 · DOI
  6. Cohen, 1992, A power primer, Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155, 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 · Paper page
  7. Ellis, 2000, Editor's statement, Language Learning, 50, xi, 10.1111/0023-8333.00135 · DOI
  8. Fazio, 2001, The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority- and majority-language students, Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 235, 10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00042-X · DOI · Paper page
  9. Ferris, 1995, Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms, TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33, 10.2307/3587804 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Ferris, 1995, Teaching students to self-edit, TESOL Journal, 4, 18
  11. Ferris, 1999, The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996), Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1, 10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Ferris, 2004, The “grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime?), Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49, 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Ferris, 2001, Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?, Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161, 10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X · DOI · Paper page
  14. Frantzen, 1995, The effects of grammar supplementation on written accuracy in an intermediate Spanish content course, Modern Language Journal, 79, 329, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb01108.x · DOI
  15. Kepner, 1991, An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills, Modern Language Journal, 75, 305, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05359.x · DOI · Paper page
  16. Kleinmann, 1977, Avoidance behavior in adult second language acquisition, Language Learning, 27, 93, 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1977.tb00294.x · DOI · Paper page
  17. Lalande, 1982, Reducing composition errors: An experiment, Modern Language Journal, 66, 140, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x · DOI · Paper page
  18. Lee, 1997, ESL learners’ performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for teaching, System, 25, 465, 10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00045-6 · DOI
  19. Lee, 2004, Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong, Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 285, 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.08.001 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Leki, 1991, The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes, Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203, 10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x · DOI · Paper page
  21. Perkins, 1975, The effect of formal language instruction on the order of morpheme acquisition, Language Learning, 25, 237, 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1975.tb00243.x · DOI
  22. Polio, 1998, “If I only had more time:” ESL learners’ changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions, Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 43, 10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90005-4 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Robb, 1986, Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality, TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83, 10.2307/3586390 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Schachter, 1974, An error in error analysis, Language Learning, 24, 205, 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1974.tb00502.x · DOI · Paper page
  25. Semke, H.M. (1980). The comparative effects of four methods of treating free-writing assignments on the second language skills and attitudes of students in college level first year German. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Minnesota.
  26. Semke, 1984, Effects of the red pen, Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195, 10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x · DOI · Paper page
  27. Sheppard, 1992, Two feedback types: Do they make a difference?, RELC Journal, 23, 103, 10.1177/003368829202300107 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Truscott, 1996, The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes, Language Learning, 46, 327, 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x · DOI · Paper page
  29. Truscott, 1999, The case for “The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris, Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 111, 10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Truscott, 1999, What's wrong with oral grammar correction, Canadian Modern Language Review, 55, 437, 10.3138/cmlr.55.4.437 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Truscott, 2001, Selecting errors for selective error correction, Concentric: Studies in English Literature and Linguistics, 27, 225
  32. Truscott, 2004, Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler, Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 337, 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.05.002 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Truscott, J.
Venue
Journal of Second Language Writing
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-12
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
255-272
ISSN
1060-3743 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003
OpenAlex
W2141497046
Cited by
719
References
4
FWCI
186.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.