ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Dictogloss-based instruction and conjunction use in Palestinian tenth-grade EFL learners.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The study aimed to examine differences in tenth-grade students' performance in the use of conjunctions between Dictogloss-based instruction and traditional instruction after controlling for pre-test performance, to examine the association of Matching familiar figures test (MFFT) response latency and error rate with post-test performance, and to explore their moderating role in the relationship between instructional method and post-test performance. Methods: Sixty Palestinian tenth-grade EFL students from two intact classes participated. One class received 45 Dictogloss sessions over 9 weeks, while the other received traditional instruction for the same duration. Performance was measured using a 20-item multiple-choice test covering coordinating, subordinating, and correlative conjunctions. ANCOVA-equivalent linear models adjusted for pre-test scores and included Pre × Method terms, HC3 robust standard errors, and Holm correction. Results: Supplementary analyses showed significant pre-to-post gains in the Dictogloss class but not in the traditional class; however, these within-group gains were interpreted descriptively. Primary analyses showed no significant adjusted Dictogloss-traditional differences after Holm correction, although significant Pre × Method interactions for coordinating, correlative, and total scores indicated variation according to pre-test performance. MFFT response latency and error rate showed no significant joint association with post-test performance and no significant moderation after Holm correction. Discussion: Overall, the findings support Dictogloss as a potentially useful structured approach for conjunction practice but do not establish its overall superiority to traditional instruction or a reliable moderating effect of MFFT performance.
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.