Examining the direct and indirect impacts of verbatim source use on linguistic complexity in integrated argumentative writing assessment

IF 4.2 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Assessing Writing Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100868
Huiying Cai , Xun Yan
{"title":"Examining the direct and indirect impacts of verbatim source use on linguistic complexity in integrated argumentative writing assessment","authors":"Huiying Cai ,&nbsp;Xun Yan","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100868","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Verbatim source use (VSU) in integrated argumentative writing tasks may enhance linguistic complexity of writing performance. This assistance might present an unequal advantage for test-takers across levels of writing proficiency, engendering validity and fairness concerns. While previous research has mostly examined the relationships between source use characteristics and proficiency levels, the relationship between VSU and linguistic complexity remains underexplored. To further unpack these relationships, this study examined both the direct impact of VSU on linguistic complexity of writing performances and its indirect impact through interaction with writing proficiency. Using natural language processing tools and techniques, we examined 34 linguistic complexity features and three VSU features of 3250 argumentative writing performances on a university-level English Placement Test (EPT). We performed exploratory factor analysis to identify linguistic complexity dimensions and applied mixed-effect models to examine how VSU features and proficiency level impacted these dimensions. Post-hoc analyses suggested weak direct impacts of different VSU features on linguistic complexity, which might reflect different essay writing strategies. However, no meaningful indirect impact was found. The findings help unravel the impact of VSU on argumentative writing and provide empirical evidence for validity arguments for integrated writing assessments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000618/pdfft?md5=faa5261e073280115613145d7ef0bb9e&pid=1-s2.0-S1075293524000618-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessing Writing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000618","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Verbatim source use (VSU) in integrated argumentative writing tasks may enhance linguistic complexity of writing performance. This assistance might present an unequal advantage for test-takers across levels of writing proficiency, engendering validity and fairness concerns. While previous research has mostly examined the relationships between source use characteristics and proficiency levels, the relationship between VSU and linguistic complexity remains underexplored. To further unpack these relationships, this study examined both the direct impact of VSU on linguistic complexity of writing performances and its indirect impact through interaction with writing proficiency. Using natural language processing tools and techniques, we examined 34 linguistic complexity features and three VSU features of 3250 argumentative writing performances on a university-level English Placement Test (EPT). We performed exploratory factor analysis to identify linguistic complexity dimensions and applied mixed-effect models to examine how VSU features and proficiency level impacted these dimensions. Post-hoc analyses suggested weak direct impacts of different VSU features on linguistic complexity, which might reflect different essay writing strategies. However, no meaningful indirect impact was found. The findings help unravel the impact of VSU on argumentative writing and provide empirical evidence for validity arguments for integrated writing assessments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在综合议论文写作评估中考察逐字来源使用对语言复杂性的直接和间接影响
在综合论证写作任务中使用逐字来源(VSU)可能会提高写作表现的语言复杂性。这种帮助可能会给不同写作水平的应试者带来不平等的优势,从而引发有效性和公平性方面的担忧。以往的研究大多考察了语源使用特征与能力水平之间的关系,但对VSU与语言复杂性之间的关系仍未进行深入探讨。为了进一步揭示这些关系,本研究既考察了 VSU 对写作表现的语言复杂性的直接影响,也考察了 VSU 通过与写作能力的交互作用而产生的间接影响。利用自然语言处理工具和技术,我们研究了大学英语分级考试(EPT)中 3250 篇议论文写作的 34 个语言复杂性特征和 3 个 VSU 特征。我们进行了探索性因子分析以确定语言复杂性维度,并应用混合效应模型来研究 VSU 特征和能力水平对这些维度的影响。事后分析表明,不同 VSU 特征对语言复杂性的直接影响较弱,这可能反映了不同的论文写作策略。但是,没有发现有意义的间接影响。研究结果有助于揭示VSU对议论文写作的影响,并为综合写作评估的有效性论证提供了经验证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Assessing Writing
Assessing Writing Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
17.90%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Assessing Writing is a refereed international journal providing a forum for ideas, research and practice on the assessment of written language. Assessing Writing publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges concerning writing assessments of all kinds, including traditional (direct and standardised forms of) testing of writing, alternative performance assessments (such as portfolios), workplace sampling and classroom assessment. The journal focuses on all stages of the writing assessment process, including needs evaluation, assessment creation, implementation, and validation, and test development.
期刊最新文献
Validating an integrated reading-into-writing scale with trained university students Understanding the SSARC model of task sequencing: Assessing L2 writing development Exploring the use of model texts as a feedback instrument in expository writing: EFL learners’ noticing, incorporations, and text quality Exploring the development of noun phrase complexity in L2 English writings across two genres L2 master’s and doctoral students’ preferences for supervisor written feedback on their theses/dissertations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1