Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An Empirical Study of the Effectiveness of Negotiation of Meaning in L2 Vocabulary Acquisition of Chinese Learners of English

Yi, Baoshu, Sun, Zhinong·2013·English Language Teaching
DOI 10.5539/elt.v6n10p120
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The study aimed to investigate whether or not negotiation of meaning is effective in L2 vocabulary acquisition of Chinese learners of English in the classroom setting. In the study there were two experimental groups (pre-modified input and negotiation of meaning) and two control groups (pre-modified input). The four groups were required to do a pre-vocabulary test, a match task and a post-vocabulary test respectively. The study showed: (1) as far as the high school groups are concerned, the experimental group outperformed the control group in terms of comprehensible input in the match task. The experimental group also did better than the control group in terms of acquiring new words in the post-vocabulary test. A strong correlation is found between comprehensible input, negotiation of meaning and acquiring new words in the high school groups; 2) As regards the college groups, the experimental group also outperformed the control group in terms of acquiring new words in the post-vocabulary test; however, two groups had no difference in obtaining comprehensible input in the match task, and no correlation was found between comprehensible input, negotiation of meaning and acquiring new words.

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 · 10.5539/elt.v6n10p120

Cites

40 of 40 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

Metadata

Authors
Yi, B., & Sun, Z.
Venue
English Language Teaching
Publisher
Canadian Center of Science and Education
Published
2013-09-03
Volume
6
Issue
10
ISSN
  • 1916-4750
  • 1916-4742
DOI
10.5539/elt.v6n10p120
Cited by
4
References
40

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.