The Contribution of Written Corrective Feedback to Language Development: A Ten Month Investigation.

By J. Bitchener, U. Knoch. 2010

488 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5ccae5bc6c81a96e3f4d50bd996e544b41ab773c

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Hossein Nassaji
2. C. V. Beuningen
3. K. Karim
4. R. Ellis
5. Natsuko Shintani
6. R. Dekeyser
7. Wataru Suzuki
8. Kazuya Saito

In Education

1. Hossein Nassaji
2. K. Karim
3. R. Dekeyser
4. R. Ellis
5. Mariano Felice
6. C. V. Beuningen
7. Wataru Suzuki
8. E. Kang

In Language and Linguistics

1. Hossein Nassaji
2. C. V. Beuningen
3. K. Karim
4. R. Ellis
5. Kazuya Saito
6. R. Lyster
7. Natsuko Shintani
8. R. Dekeyser

Citations in the corpus

• The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing (2018, methodology): “A number of studies have empirically compared the effectiveness of direct and indirect feedback (e.g., Bitchener, 2008; Bitchener et al., 2005; Bitchener & Knoch, 2009a, 2009b; Lalande, 1982; Mirzaii & Aliabadi, 2013; Robb et al., 1986; Semke, 1984; Sheen, 2007; Sheen et al., 2009, Sheppard, 1992;…”
• The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in Improving L2 Written Accuracy: A Meta‐Analysis (2015, methodology): “All effect sizes were calibrated using a professional meta-analysis program called Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) (Borenstein et al., 2005). For our purposes, the random effects model was adopted, which is premised on the assumption that the true effect size varies across studies. This assumption”
• Effects of Written Feedback and Revision on Learners’ Accuracy in Using Two English Grammatical Structures (2014, background): “A number of recent WCF studies have investigated articles (e.g., Bitchener & Knoch, 2010; Sheen, 2007).”
• Corrective Feedback in L2 Writing: Theoretical Perspectives, Empirical Insights, and Future Directions (2010, background): “Moreover, the reported accuracy gains proved to be very durable; Bitchener and Knoch (2010a), for example, showed that students who had received focused CF (only once) continued to outperform students whose errors had not been corrected over a 10-month period.”
• Artificial error generation for translation-based grammatical error correction (2016, background): “accuracy either in the short or long term (Ashwell, 2000; Bitchener and Knoch, 2008, 2010; Ellis et al., 2008; Ferris, 2006; Sheen, 2007; van Beuningen et al., 2012).”
• Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy (2019, background): “The results of these more recent studies (e.g. Bitchener, 2008; Bitchener & Knoch, 2010a, 2010b; Ellis, Sheen, Murakami, & Takashima, 2008; Sheen, 2007, 2010; Sheen, Wright, & Moldawa, 2009; Shintani, Ellis, & Suzuki, 2014; Stefanou & Révész, 2015; Van Beuningen, de Jong, & Kuiken, 2012) provide…”