错误类型和工作记忆在第一语言自我纠错书面纠正反馈效果中的作用

IF 1.9 1区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION
Mohammad Nowbakht, T. Olive
{"title":"错误类型和工作记忆在第一语言自我纠错书面纠正反馈效果中的作用","authors":"Mohammad Nowbakht, T. Olive","doi":"10.1177/0741088320986554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examined the role of error-type and working memory (WM) in the effectiveness of direct-metalinguistic and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on self error-correction in first-language writing. Fifty-one French first-year psychology students volunteered to participate in the experiment. They carried out a first-language error-correction task after receiving WCF on typographical, orthographic, grammatical, and semantic errors. Results indicated that error-type affected the efficacy of WCF. In both groups, typographical error-correction was performed better than the others; orthographic and grammatical error-correction were not different, but both were corrected more frequently than semantic errors. Between-group comparisons showed no difference between the two groups in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors, while semantic error-correction was performed significantly better for the direct group. Results revealed that WM was not involved in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors in both groups. It did, however, predict semantic error-correction only in response to direct-metalinguistic WCF. In addition, the processing component of WM was predictive of semantic error-correction in the direct WCF group. These findings suggest that error-type mediates the effectiveness of WCF on written error-correction at the monitoring stage of writing, while WM does not associate with all WCF types efficacy at this stage.","PeriodicalId":47351,"journal":{"name":"Written Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0741088320986554","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role of Error Type and Working Memory in Written Corrective Feedback Effectiveness on First-Language Self Error-Correction\",\"authors\":\"Mohammad Nowbakht, T. Olive\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0741088320986554\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study examined the role of error-type and working memory (WM) in the effectiveness of direct-metalinguistic and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on self error-correction in first-language writing. Fifty-one French first-year psychology students volunteered to participate in the experiment. They carried out a first-language error-correction task after receiving WCF on typographical, orthographic, grammatical, and semantic errors. Results indicated that error-type affected the efficacy of WCF. In both groups, typographical error-correction was performed better than the others; orthographic and grammatical error-correction were not different, but both were corrected more frequently than semantic errors. Between-group comparisons showed no difference between the two groups in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors, while semantic error-correction was performed significantly better for the direct group. Results revealed that WM was not involved in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors in both groups. It did, however, predict semantic error-correction only in response to direct-metalinguistic WCF. In addition, the processing component of WM was predictive of semantic error-correction in the direct WCF group. These findings suggest that error-type mediates the effectiveness of WCF on written error-correction at the monitoring stage of writing, while WM does not associate with all WCF types efficacy at this stage.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47351,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Written Communication\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0741088320986554\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Written Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088320986554\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Written Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088320986554","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本研究考察了错误类型和工作记忆(WM)在直接元语言和间接书面纠正反馈(WCF)对第一语言写作中自我纠错的有效性中的作用。51名法国心理学一年级学生自愿参加了这项实验。他们在收到关于印刷、拼写、语法和语义错误的WCF后,进行了第一次语言纠错任务。结果表明,错误类型影响WCF的疗效。在这两组中,排印错误校正的表现都比其他组好;拼写错误和语法错误的纠正没有什么不同,但两者的纠正频率都高于语义错误。组间比较显示,两组在纠正印刷、拼写和语法错误方面没有差异,而直接组的语义错误纠正效果明显更好。结果显示,WM在两组中都没有参与纠正印刷、拼写和语法错误。然而,它确实预测了语义纠错只是对直接元语言学WCF的反应。此外,在直接WCF组中,WM的处理成分可以预测语义纠错。这些发现表明,在写作的监测阶段,错误类型介导了WCF在书面纠错方面的有效性,而WM在这个阶段并不与所有WCF类型的有效性相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Role of Error Type and Working Memory in Written Corrective Feedback Effectiveness on First-Language Self Error-Correction
This study examined the role of error-type and working memory (WM) in the effectiveness of direct-metalinguistic and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on self error-correction in first-language writing. Fifty-one French first-year psychology students volunteered to participate in the experiment. They carried out a first-language error-correction task after receiving WCF on typographical, orthographic, grammatical, and semantic errors. Results indicated that error-type affected the efficacy of WCF. In both groups, typographical error-correction was performed better than the others; orthographic and grammatical error-correction were not different, but both were corrected more frequently than semantic errors. Between-group comparisons showed no difference between the two groups in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors, while semantic error-correction was performed significantly better for the direct group. Results revealed that WM was not involved in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors in both groups. It did, however, predict semantic error-correction only in response to direct-metalinguistic WCF. In addition, the processing component of WM was predictive of semantic error-correction in the direct WCF group. These findings suggest that error-type mediates the effectiveness of WCF on written error-correction at the monitoring stage of writing, while WM does not associate with all WCF types efficacy at this stage.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Written Communication
Written Communication COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
15.80%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Written Communication is an international multidisciplinary journal that publishes theory and research in writing from fields including anthropology, English, education, history, journalism, linguistics, psychology, and rhetoric. Among topics of interest are the nature of writing ability; the assessment of writing; the impact of technology on writing (and the impact of writing on technology); the social and political consequences of writing and writing instruction; nonacademic writing; literacy (including workplace and emergent literacy and the effects of classroom processes on literacy development); the social construction of knowledge; the nature of writing in disciplinary and professional domains.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信