Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,042

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Computer‐Mediated Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice

Open access
WARSCHAUER, MARK·1997·The Modern Language Journal

Abstract

Recently interest has grown concerning the uses of online communication for language teaching. Yet this growing interest in computer‐mediated collaborative language learning has not been matched by sufficient research and theory. This article introduces a conceptual framework for understanding the role of computer‐mediated interaction based on a sociocultural analysis of the relationship among text, talk, and learning. The article then analyzes current research according to five features particular to online interaction.

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 · 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb05514.x

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cited by

See all 1,042

Metadata

Authors
WARSCHAUER, M.
Venue
The Modern Language Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-12
Volume
81
Issue
4
Pages
470-481
ISSN
  • 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-4781
OpenAlex
W2017727824
Cited by
1,042
References
5
FWCI
32.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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.