Peer feedback has been widely used in English as a foreign language (EFL) writing classes, but its effect is highly variable and its quality and validity are often questioned by students as well as teachers. This research aims to explore the effects of teacher intervention on student use of different types of peer feedback and on their self-revision of writing texts. The study employed a quasi-experimental design with two experimental groups receiving either the teacher’s direct correction for erroneous peer feedback or indication of inaccurate peer feedback with symbols and a control group receiving no teacher intervention on peer feedback. One hundred and ten non-English major graduate students in three parallel writing classes participated in the study. The study lasted for one and a half months, during which the participants completed two essays, conducted peer feedback, and revised their essay drafts based on the peer feedback received. The adoption rates and accurate revision rates of different types of peer feedback as well as self-correction rates for the three groups were compared and analysed. It was found that the two groups with teacher intervention made significantly more accurate revisions in the subsequent revised essays higher than the control group. Additionally, the adoption rate and accurate revision rate of direct correction were significantly higher than the other two types of feedback. These results have implications for incorporating peer feedback in EFL writing class and for future peer feedback research.

同伴反馈已广泛用于英语作为外语 (EFL) 写作课程，但其效果参差不齐，其质量和有效性经常受到学生和教师的质疑。本研究旨在探讨教师干预对学生使用不同类型的同伴反馈以及他们对写作文本的自我修改的影响。该研究采用准实验设计，两个实验组接受教师对错误同伴反馈的直接纠正或用符号指示不准确的同伴反馈，而对照组则不接受教师对同伴反馈的干预。三个平行写作班的110名非英语专业研究生参加了研究。研究持续了一个半月，在此期间，参与者完成了两篇论文，进行了同行反馈，并根据收到的同行反馈修改了他们的论文草稿。比较分析了三组不同类型同伴反馈的采用率和准确修改率以及自改率。结果发现，有教师干预的两组在随后的修改论文中做出的修改准确率明显高于对照组。此外，直接修正的采用率和准确修正率明显高于其他两种反馈。这些结果对于将同伴反馈纳入 EFL 写作课以及未来的同伴反馈研究具有重要意义。比较分析了三组不同类型同伴反馈的采用率和准确修改率以及自改率。结果发现，有教师干预的两组在随后的修改论文中做出的修改准确率明显高于对照组。此外，直接修正的采用率和准确修正率明显高于其他两种反馈。这些结果对于将同伴反馈纳入 EFL 写作课以及未来的同伴反馈研究具有重要意义。比较分析了三组不同类型同伴反馈的采用率和准确修改率以及自改率。结果发现，有教师干预的两组在随后的修改论文中做出的修改准确率明显高于对照组。此外，直接修正的采用率和准确修正率明显高于其他两种反馈。这些结果对于将同伴反馈纳入 EFL 写作课以及未来的同伴反馈研究具有重要意义。结果发现，有教师干预的两组在随后的修改论文中做出的修改准确率明显高于对照组。此外，直接修正的采用率和准确修正率明显高于其他两种反馈。这些结果对于将同伴反馈纳入 EFL 写作课以及未来的同伴反馈研究具有重要意义。结果发现，有教师干预的两组在随后的修改论文中做出的修改准确率明显高于对照组。此外，直接修正的采用率和准确修正率明显高于其他两种反馈。这些结果对于将同伴反馈纳入 EFL 写作课以及未来的同伴反馈研究具有重要意义。