A reflection on ‘the language learning potential’ of written CF

By J. Bitchener. 2012

186 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7776053cd514f22cd80385ddc857f44fb5143c63

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. Paul Thompson
2. K. Rajagopalan
3. E. Kang
4. Ken Hyland
5. ZhaoHong Han
6. Jim McKinley
7. Shih-Chieh Chien
8. R. Ruegg

In Language and Linguistics

1. Paul Thompson
2. K. Rajagopalan
3. E. Kang
4. Ken Hyland
5. ZhaoHong Han
6. N. Storch
7. Younghee Sheen
8. Hossein Nassaji

In Literature and Literary Theory

1. Paul Thompson
2. K. Rajagopalan
3. E. Kang
4. Ken Hyland
5. ZhaoHong Han
6. N. Storch
7. Younghee Sheen
8. Raffaella Negretti

Citations in the corpus

• The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in Improving L2 Written Accuracy: A Meta‐Analysis (2015, background): “Consulting the reference sections of relevant book chapters, published meta-analyses, and narrative reviews (e.g., Bitchener, 2012; Hyland & Hyland, 2006) as additional sources of potential studies.”
• The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (2018, background): “Our identities are social, psychological, historical and cultural at the same time.”
• The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes (2016, background): “Regarding the language learning potential of feedback processing, Bitchener (2012; Bitchener & Ferris, 2012) claims that this processing can contribute to learning by helping learners to expand their explicit knowledge and to increase the accuracy of their use of the L2. These learning outcomes are ”