The DOI matches its Crossref record; 73 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL
Open accessOverview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“The results showed that the collaborative revision strategy instruction via modelling was more effective for improving undergraduates' revision skills than practising the instructed strategy following guiding questions presented in a handout.”
From Learning paths in synthesis writing: Which learning path contributes most to which learning outcome? (2020) · cites this paper as Van Steendam et al. 2010
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
Multilevel analysis techniques and applications
Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2002) · Cited by 6,006
Goldstein, H. (2006) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2006.s417 · Cited by 4,960
The Psychology of Written Composition
Cumming, A. H., Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989) · Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/327270 · Cited by 2,806
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
(1977) · doi:10.1016/c2013-0-10517-x · Cited by 2,457
MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S. W., & Fitzgerald, J. (2005) · Cited by 2,327
Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (1989) · Springer series in cognitive development · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-3618-4 · Cited by 1,926
A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445 · Cited by 1,609 · cited 3×
“They are particularly effective in teaching students criteria for reflecting on and evaluating writing, and thereby improving their revision skills (Englert et al., 2006; Graham & Perin, 2007).”
BackgroundCollaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches
Jones, A. C. (2000) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/s0360-1315(00)00011-7 · Cited by 1,511
Barron, B. (2003) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1203_1 · Cited by 1,446
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Hayes, 1987, Cognitive processes in revision, Vol. 2, 176
- MacArthur, 2004, Revision with struggling writers, Vol. 13, 125
- Mittan, 1989, The peer review process: harnessing students' communicative power, 207
- Oxford University Press, 2001
- Rijlaarsdam, 2000, What do writers learn from peer comments on argumentative texts?, Vol. 6, 167
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007 · Cited by 615
“…the training of peer assessors in assessment skills (Sluijsmans et al., 2002), (d) methods of teaching students how to provide peer feedback (Van Steendam et al., 2010), (e) the matching principles for peers (Van den Berg, Admiraal, & Pilot, 2006), and (f) teacher support for peer feedback (Van…”
MethodEffective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions
van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. (2010) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004 · Cited by 536
Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing
Steiss, J., Tate, T., Graham, S., Cruz, J., Hebert, M., Wang, J., Moon, Y., Tseng, W., Warschauer, M., & Olson, C. B. (2024) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894 · Cited by 509
Student revision with peer and expert reviewing
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. A. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006 · Cited by 470
Strijbos, J.-W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008 · Cited by 399
Metadata
- Authors
- Van Steendam, E., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sercu, L., & Van den Bergh, H.
- Affiliations
- Utrecht University (NL)
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Venue
- Learning and Instruction
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-08
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 316-327
- ISSN
- 0959-4752 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2157381667
- Cited by
- 124
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 51.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Learning and Instruction (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Lirias (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- peer feedback, social cognitive model, observation, practice, strategy acquisition, EFL writing, business English, global feedback
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
