Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33705431›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Predictors of literacy in adulthood: Evidence from 33 countries.

Aki-Juhani Kyröläinen, Victor Kuperman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Aki-Juhani KyröläinenDepartment of Linguistics and Languages, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8874-9005
Victor KupermanDepartment of Linguistics and Languages, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8961-3767

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What makes a literate person? What leads to literacy gains and losses within and between individuals and countries? This paper provides new evidence that helps answer these questions. The present comparative analysis of literacy is based on large representative samples from the Survey of Adult Skills conducted in 33 countries, with 25-65 year old participants. We provide, for the first time, estimates of relative importance for a comprehensive set of experiential factors, motivations, incentives, parental influence, demands of workplace, and other predictors of influence. We sketch a configuration of factors that predicts an "ideal" reader, i.e., the optimal literacy performance. Moreover, we discover a pivotal role of the age effect in predicting variability between countries. Countries with the highest literacy scores are the ones where literacy decreases with age the most strongly. We discuss this finding against current accounts of aging effects, cohort effects and others. Finally, we provide methodological recommendations for experimental studies of aging in cognitive tasks like reading.

Indexed as

LiteracyAdultAgedDatabases, FactualHumansMathematical ComputingMiddle AgedReading

Identifiers

PMID33705431
PMCPMC7951848

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.