the last turn of the dialogue and choose the most appropriate meaning pragmatic comprehension.
There were 20 numbers of multiple choice test being used in the present study, number 1 – 11 were adopted from Rover 2005 and number 12 -20 were
adopted from Bouton 1988. The multiple choice test could be seen in Appendix 1. The blueprint was also made to see the content validity, as Hughes 1989
suggests “the content validity of the test could also be determined by a blueprint” Hughes, 1989: 22. The following table will show the blueprint of the multiple
choice test being used.
Table 3.1.The blueprint of the test
No. Implicature Characteristic Questionnaire number
1 Relevance
3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 17 2
Pope Question relevance 6, 11, 13, 16,
3 Manner
1, 5, 10, 20 4
Quality 2, 9, 14
5 Quantity
15, 18, 19
The Multiple-choice test used can be seen in the Appendix I.
D. Data Collection
The data was collected separately for each semester level, and each level had the same length of time duration. The time duration given was 30 minutes.
All the participants could manage to finish the Multiple-choice test in time.
E. Data Analysis Technique
The data was analyzed using statistics because the study was a quantitative research. Gall 2007 mentions that “statistics are mathematical
techniques for analyzing numerical data to accomplish various purposes, and statistics are used in virtually all quantitative research, but in many qualitative as
well” Gall, 2007: 125. The type of scores is continues scores, “Continuous scores are values of a variable located on a continuum, rating from high to low
level of the variable and along with there are an indefinite number of points at which score can occur” Gall, 2007: 130. Since the study was to see the students’
pragmatic competence, so the scale measurement was interval, “competence is always interval, because everybody must have some competence” ibid.
There were some steps in doing the data analysis. Firstly, the researcher distributed the multiple choice test to the participants. The participants’ response
or answer to each statement was presented in the table of data frequency and data percentage. The scoring of each option in the multiple choice test was based on
measurement which was used to measure a competence, the interval scale. The score criteria was partly adopted from the Cohen and Olshtain
Communicative Ability Scales Cohen, 1994 which was also used in Rover and Bouton’s study, because the present study was only measuring the participants’
pragmatic competence in implicature through the Multiple-choice test while the Cohen and Olshtain Communicative Ability Scales was intended to measure
almost all pragmatic competence aspects through Oral Discourse Completion Tasks DCTs.
The Cohen and Olshtain Communicative Ability Scales as follows: 0 = No answer
Wrong answers Answer irrelevant to the given situation
Answer which do not convey a speaker’s intention at all or change the speaker’s intention
1 = Acceptable answers which contain one or more of the following characteristics but still can convey the speaker correct meaning and
intention: too much or too little information, grammatical or lexical errors impairing but not preventing the interlocutor understanding
the meaning or intention of the utterance, too polite or rude linguistic expression.
2 = Appropriate answers which fully convey a speaker’s correct meaning and intention and contain the following characteristics: proper
amount of information, grammatical and lexical correctness or minor errors which do not affect the interlocutor’s ability to understand the
meaning or intention of the utterance, polite linguistic expression. Since the present study was only done using a Multiple-choice test in
which the participants were not to produce linguistic expression and the language competence being measured was only implicature in which the possibility of
misinterpretation can normally occur, the present study adopted the same score criteria, namely: 0, 1, 2 for different reasons. Zero 0 score was given because the
participants did not choose any option given which meant the participants did not
