The Effectiveness of Corrective Feedback in SLA: A Meta-Analysis.

By Shaofeng Li. 2010

866 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/8866155228798847935edbb693f15ec40f1b3e02

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

In Language and Linguistics

In Literature and Literary Theory

Citations in the corpus

Social Robots for Language Learning: A Review (2018, background): “Furthermore, adaptivity and feedback have remained under-studied and should have a more central role in future studies, given the importance of adapting to the learner’s level and providing helpful feedback in L2 education and education in general (Li, 2010; Vygotsky, 1980).”
Quantitative Research Methods, Study Quality, and Outcomes: The Case of Interaction Research (2011, background): “The immense volume of research on this topic is reflected in the six meta-analyses that have synthesized quantitative findings from studies of interactional CF (Keck et al., 2006; Li, 2010; Lyster & Saito, 2010; Mackey & Goo, 2007; Norris & Ortega, 2000; Russell & Spada, 2006).”
Exploring non-native English-speaking teachers' cognitions about corrective feedback in teaching English oral communication (2015, background): “Taken together, meta-analytic reviews of research on the effectiveness of CF (e.g. Li, 2010) show that CF is effective and the effectiveness of CF is mediated by instructional setting variables, student variables, target form variables, and teacher variables, among others.”
Interactional Feedback and the Impact of Attitude and Motivation on Noticing L2 Form (2011, background): “In the field of L2 learning, however, there appears to be a growing consensus among the majority of researchers concerning the significance of the role played by negative evidence in the process (e.g., Ammar and Spada, 2006; Shaofeng, 2010; Oliver, 2000; Mackey, 2006).”
The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in Improving L2 Written Accuracy: A Meta‐Analysis (2015, methodology): “A number of researchers, including James (1998), have asserted that the indirect approach is more likely to have long-term positive effects on students’ accuracy since it requires learners to self-discover the correct forms (Li, 2010).”
In Defense of Tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and Real Issues (2016, neutral): “…and short-term effect of explicit feedback was greater, the longer-term effect size for recasts (a prime example of “incidental, on-linefocusonform”)wasslightlylargerthantheshort-termeffect,moreeffective thanexplicitfeedbackondelayedposttests,andmoreenduring,evenincreasing overtime(Li,2010,p.343).”
Meta-analysis in Second Language Research: Choices and Challenges (2010, methodology): “tion to comparable meta-analyses of L1 (Plonsky, in press) and L2 research (e.g., Lee & Huang, 2008; Li, 2010), more often than not referring to Norris and Ortega (2000) as a point of reference.”