Commenting on Writing

By Kwangsu Cho, Christian D. Schunn, D. Charney. 2006

168 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/12eb075adad210b4798ebdfdb184ad9d6a8b2f8c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. Christian D. Schunn
2. Yong Wu
3. Young Hoan Cho
4. Kwangsu Cho
5. Sarah Gielen
6. Filip Dochy
7. Andrew E. Walker
8. Melissa M. Nelson

In Literature and Literary Theory

1. Christian D. Schunn
2. Andrew E. Walker
3. Gulfidan Can
4. Yong Wu
5. Melissa M. Nelson
6. Young Hoan Cho

Citations in the corpus

• Online peer assessment: effects of cognitive and affective feedback (2011, background): “Praise is usually recommended and is found to be one of the most common features present in the feedback provided by undergraduates (Cho et al. 2006; Nilson 2003; Sadler and Good 2006).”
• From feedback to revisions: Effects of feedback features and perceptions (2020, background): “, 2017), especially when multiple peer reviewers are involved (Cho et al., 2006; Tseng & Tsai, 2007) and accountability features are used (Paré & Joordens, 2008).”
• A Model for Doctoral Students’ Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Written Feedback for Academic Writing (2011, methodology): “), types of feedback given (Cho et al., 2006), expectations of them”
• A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum (2010, background): “, 2006 , 2008 ; Cho & Schunn, 2007 ; Cho & MacArthur, in press) peer feedback on undergraduate students’ writing products is not only compared to teacher feedback but also to multiple peer feedback.”
• The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance (2009, background): “Moreover, undergraduate peers are particularly likely to include praise in their feedback (Cho et al. 2006).”
• To resist it or to embrace it? Examining ChatGPT’s potential to support teacher feedback in EFL writing (2023, unknown): “Drawing on the typologies of feedback used in Cho et al. (2006) and Wilson and Czik (2016), we developed a coding scheme for classifying the type of ChatGPT-and teacher-generated feedback (see Appendix Table 10).”
• Peer reviewers learn from giving comments (2011, background): “a self-contained message on a single issue of peer writing (Cho et al. 2006).”