ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
A didactic illustration of writing skill growth through a longitudinal diagnostic classification model.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Diagnostic classification models (DCMs) have received increasing attention in cross-sectional studies. However, L2 learning studies, tracking skill development over time, require models suited for longitudinal analyses. Growth DCMs offer a promising framework for such analyses. Method: This study utilizes writing data from two learner groups: one receiving peer feedback ( Results: The multi-group analysis revealed similar V-shaped growth trajectories for Grammar and Vocabulary, along with consistent inverted V-shaped patterns for Organization and Content in both groups. Discussion: The results showed minor differences between the two groups, potentially indicating the limited impact of peer feedback on L2 writing development. This could be attributed to the social dynamics between peers.
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.