MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406808464 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v15n3p339

Mediation as Intercultural Communication: A Narrative Review

2025· review· en· W4406808464 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Evangelia Xirofotou

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict Management and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMediationNarrativeIntercultural communicationComputer sciencePsychologySociologyLinguisticsCommunicationPhilosophySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Written mediation is a critical skill that enables individuals from diverse languages and cultures to communicate with each other effectively. Developing written mediation skills is essential in language learning classrooms and is included as a component of the National Foreign Language Exam System (KPG) for advancing harmonious global societies. This narrative review explores written mediation as a form of intercultural communication in English language classroom contexts. The review provides insights into the nature and purpose of written mediation, the role of the mediator, and the competencies needed to fulfill the role with the objective of providing the information for language learning classrooms to develop and instruct written mediation skills effectively. This review goes beyond traditionally held views of mediators as interpreters primarily concerned with linguistic aspects and underscores the close relationship between and the need for a broader conceptualization of mediation that includes both language and culture. In particular, critical cultural awareness is emphasized as a primary driver of effective mediation, underscoring the importance of addressing cultural components within the English language teaching context. English language teachers have a vital role in promoting the development of learners' intercultural competence, ultimately ensuring they are competent mediators equipped to facilitate intercultural encounters.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicConflict Management and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207