(Kruskall-Wallis-I Way Anova:X² =26.7, df = 4, p<.0000). Particularly, the Definition group
provided significantly more stories than the Ostensive definition (Wilcoxon,: Z=2.8, p<.005)
and the Lexical contrast group (Wilcoxon: Z=3.6, p<.0005) during post test 2. During post
test 3, the Lexical contrast group provided significantly more stories than the Control
(Wilcoxon: Z = 2.1, p<.05) and Phonological Control groups (Wilcoxon: Z = 2.04, p<.05).
In addition, the Definition group performed significantly better than the two Control and
Experimental groups (Z=3.8, p<.0005; Z=3.8, p<.0005; Z=3.5, p<.0005; Z=2.2, p<.05). No
significant differences were found between the two Control groups and the Ostensive
definition group in any of the post tests. Diagram 7.10 presents the significant differences
between the groups

Diagram 7.10 Significant group differences in the provision of stories in the story

Does children ^,s provision of stories increase with increased exposure to the lexical items?
All the children provided more stories over time. Particularly, they provided significantly
more stories during post test 3 than during post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=3.3, p<.005). The
analysis was repeated separately for each group. The same pattern was found for the Lexical
contrast group (Wilcoxon: Z=2.1, p<.05) and the Definition groups (Wilcoxon: Z=3.2,
p<.005). In addition, the Definition group provided significantly more stories during post test
2 than post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=2.3, p<.05).

266

<<   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   >>

More intriguing information