ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Development of the reading literacy questionnaire for EFL learners at primary schools.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have indicated that there are a variety of factors influencing reading literacy assessment, including linguistic, cognitive, and affective factors, but little has been done on how to integrate these influential factors reasonably in a reading literacy instrument. As such, the purpose of this study is to develop and validate an English Reading Literacy Questionnaire (ERLQ) for English as foreign language (EFL) learners at the elementary level. The ERLQ was designed and revised through three rounds of validation with a sample of 784 pupils (Grades 3-6) in six primary schools from six provinces in China. Validity and reliability tests of the questionnaire were conducted with item analysis, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), reliability test, and the analysis of criterion validity in SPSS 26.0 and AMOS 23.0. Results indicated that the revised ERLQ had high internal consistency, ranging from 0.729 to 0.823. The criterion validity of the ERLQ was supported by significant correlations to the Chinese Students' English Rating Scale verified by the authoritative department, with a correlation coefficient of 0.871. The study shows that the revised questionnaire, with 3 dimensions of 14 items, has high reliability and validity, which can be used as an assessment instrument for the intended audience. It also suggests that modifications may be made for further use in other regions and countries, depending on the background information of the learners.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.