Oral Accuracy, Field Dependent/Independent Cognitive Styles and Corrective Feedback

Ali Mohammadi Darabad


This study examined the effect of two types of corrective feedback (prompts and recasts) on oral accuracy of 150 Iranian elementary EFL participants (18–25 years old) considering their cognitive styles as being field dependent/independent (FD/FI) measured by Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT). We used the Key English Test 2 (KET) (2003) as a placement test. Of these participants, based on the scores taken from placement test and group embedded figures test, 60 participants (30 field dependents and 30 field independents) were selected and randomly assigned into three groups (prompt, recast, and control groups) each of them containing 20 FD and FI members. The study followed placement test, GEFT, pre-test, treatment sessions, immediate post-test, and delayed post-test design. A mixed between-within subjects analysis of variance (SPANOVA) was conducted to assess the impact of the two different interventions (prompts, recasts) on participants scores on oral accuracy, across three time periods (pre-intervention, post-intervention, three weeks follow-up). There was a statistically significant interaction between program types (corrective feedback) and the time, and also a substantial main effect for that, with both groups showing an increase on the scores of oral accuracy across three time periods. The main effect comparing the two types of intervention was statistically significant suggesting a significant difference in the effectiveness of the two teaching approaches showing the superiority of prompts over recasts in post-tests. In the meantime, the results didn’t show any interaction between cognitive types and feedback conditions in terms of target language accuracy.

Full Text:


DOI: https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v1i1.3273


  • There are currently no refbacks.

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the 'macrothink.org' domain to your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.

Copyright © Macrothink Institute      ISSN 2325-0887