Table 2 A Summary of the Patterns of Exploratory Feedback Exchanges in CAPR

Sullivan and Pratt (1996)

Turn taking: positive comment & suggestions for revision.

Di Giovanni and Nagaswami (2001)

(1) Questioning: requesting such as checking comprehension, and requesting suggestions (5%), (2) explanation such as opinions, agreement and disagreement (7%), (3) restatement (21%) & (4) suggestion (24%).

Liu and Sadler (2003)

Suggestion (19.3%), evaluation (25.79%), alteration (46.8%) and clarification (8.9%).

Tuzi (2004)

Advising, questions (requests), statements, alternatives and criticism.

Jones et al. (2006)

Initiating moves: offering, stating and questioning and responding moves: clarifying, confirming, accepting, rejecting, compliance and acknowledging moves.

Hewett (2006)

Informing, directing attention, eliciting peers’ opinions and offering suggestions.

Liou and Peng (2009)

Suggestion (25/21.6%), evaluation (33/28.4%) and clarification (4/3.4%).

Ho and Usaha (2009)

Evaluation, clarification, alteration, suggestion/advice, explanation, confirmation and statement with clarification (29.5% + 27.36%) and suggestion/advice (29.02% + 26.42%) as the highest in both sessions.

Song and Usaha(2009)

Question (18.0%), suggestion (15.4%), criticism (14.9%), and evaluation (13.5%) while the least are explanation (8.7%), clarification (6.2%) and restatement (4.5%).

Cha and Park (2010)

Openings, closing, statements, questions including requests, responses, suggestions, opinions, correction & topic. The number of such categories varied from the lowest 52 to the highest 437.

Ho (2010)

Suggestion/advice (10.3%), clarification (9.3%) confirmation (4.7%) and evaluation (4.3%), alteration, statement and explanation (4%, 3.3% and 2.9%, respectively).

Ho and Usaha (2011)

Suggestion/advice (27.5%), clarification (23.6%) confirmation (12.8%) and evaluation (12.3%), alteration, statement and explanation (9%, 8.6% and 6.2%, respectively).

Chang (2012)

Suggestion, evaluation, alteration and clarification with different percentages (64% & 23%), (5% & 1%), (19% & 5%) and (13% & 70) for evaluation, clarification, suggestion and alteration in both synchronous and asynchronous CAPR.

Bradley (2014)

Suggestion (120) followed by evaluation (114), alteration (48) and clarification (32).

Razak and Saeed (2014)

Seeking clarifications & confirmation check), justifying and scaffolding: definitions and using L1.

Ho (2015)

In both review sessions, suggestion (71/37% & 90/48%), evaluation (54/28% & 37/20%), clarification (24/12% & 12/6%), alteration (14/7% & 17/9%) and other (5/4% & 17/9%) while the least frequently posted commenting type was response (3/2% & 13/7%).

Saeed and Ghazali (2016)

Identifying problems, evaluating, agreements and disagreements,clarifications, suggestions, seeking for clarifications, justifications, confirming and lack of understanding.