ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Comparing Chinese and Western classroom learning environment research: a bibliometric analysis and visualization.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identifying the most recommended novel teaching strategy in orthopaedics education: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A comprehensive cross-national understanding of the classroom learning environment (CLE) is critical to advancing CLE's development. This study compares the English and Chinese CLE literature to enhance a complete understanding of CLE. We conducted bibliometric analysis on 3,130 English literature from Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and 1,261 Chinese literature from the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI). The results show that both Chinese and English literature focus on the influence of CLE on students' cognitive and affective learning outcomes and the incorporation of information technology in CLE. The results also reveal the differences between Chinese and English literature from two perspectives: (1) Chinese CLE research mainly focuses on English education, and English CLE research mainly focuses on science education and (2) Chinese CLE research mainly analyzed the pedagogical aspect of CLE, while English CLE research focused on CLE's social and psychological aspects. We also discussed that future research should focus on (1) the balance of analyzing CLE from the perspective of students and other educational stakeholders such as teachers and school leaders, (2) student differences from the pedagogical level, (3) the physical level of CLE, (4) the use of statistical methods such as structural equation modeling that can analyze the mechanisms underlying the effects of CLE on student learning, and (5) the interdisciplinary research on CLE.
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.