ArticleHeliyon2024
Advancing English as second language communication: The effectiveness of online pragmatic training on essential speech acts.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of pragmatic competence is crucial for enhancing learners' ability to communicate more effectively in English in various cultural and social contexts. Numerous studies have explored the impact of implicit and/or explicit training on language learners' pragmatic development. However, the scarcity of online pragmatic training has motivated this research. To this end, a randomized experimental study was conducted to determine whether online pragmatic treatment could enhance students' pragmatic competence and to identify which procedure, explicit or implicit, is more effective. Sixty university students were randomly assigned to three groups of 20: two experimental groups (implicit and explicit) and one control group. 'Google Meet' was used for online training. All three groups were given a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) as a pre-test featuring 12 different scenarios, three for each of four speech acts. At the end of the treatment, the participants of the experimental and control groups received the same DCT as a post-test. The findings revealed that the participants of the experimental groups improved their pragmatic competence compared to the pre-test and post-test results of the control group. Although there is a difference between the implicit and explicit groups' post-test results, the difference is not statistically significant. Still, according to Cohen's d effect size, the effect size of the explicit group (1.5) is larger than that of the implicit group (1.1). According to the results of the study, it can be said that pragmatic training contributes to the effective use of the target language for communicative purposes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.