Interactional Feedback and the Impact of Attitude and Motivation on Noticing L2 Form
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of second language (L2) studies have recently discovered the positive impacts of interactional feedback (IF) in L2 development by connecting the underlying processes such as noticing. The current study followed a two-fold purpose: first to examine the impact of IF on noticing question forms in Iranian L2 classroom context and secondly to investigate the possible effects of motivation and attitude on noting IF. IF was provided to experimental group learners in response to their production problems with question forms. Learners’ noticing was assessed through on-line learning journals, introspective comments while checking with audiotapes, and questionnaire responses. Learners’ motivation was also assessed using Gardner’s (1996) attitude/motivation test. The results point to a positive relationship between IF in the classroom and the learners’ reports about question forms of English. The results also confirmed the existence of a positive correlation between motivation and noticing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it