Cited by 120EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesLinguistics and Language Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Errors, Interaction, and Correction: A Study of Native-Nonnative Conversations

Abstract

Ann E. Chun, Richard R. Day, N. Ann Chenoweth, Stuart Luppescu, Errors, Interaction, and Correction: A Study of Native-Nonnative Conversations, TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 4 (Dec., 1982), pp. 537-547

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3586471

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 7 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–119 of 119

Metadata

Authors
Chun, A. E., Day, R. R., Chenoweth, N. A., & Luppescu, S.
Venue
TESOL Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1982-12
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
537
ISSN
0039-8322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2094932222
Cited by
120
References
7
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
15.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
TESOL Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
Keywords
error correction, second language acquisition, interlanguage, conversation analysis

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