ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
L2 Arabic learners' processing of Arabic garden-path sentences: a consistent reading pattern.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The main purpose of this study was to investigate to what extent the L2 Arabic learners' reading process is affected by the incomplete representation of speech (the absence of short vowels and diacritics) while reading ambiguous sentences (garden path sentences). Method: With a self-paced reading software program, 41 non-native male students, aged from 22 to 26, enrolled in King Saud University, participated in reading 44 sentences (followed by reading comprehension questions) representing three reading conditions, plain, vowelized-discretized, and wrongly-vowelized. Results: For the reading times data, the analysis revealed that the GP structure had a significant effect on the reading processes of L2 Arabic learners; it took them longer to read the GP sentences than their non-GP counterparts. For the reading comprehension, the analysis did not reveal any significant differences between the means for the percentages of correct responses. For the comparison between the three reading conditions, a significant difference was found: it took the participants on average less time to read the GP sentences when presented plain, and more time with the incorrect representation. However, their reading comprehension was not affected. Conclusion: In addition to the good-enough model and the nature of Arabic morphology, the reading experience, is a good candidate to start with as an important factor in the interpretation of the ineffectiveness of the GP structure on the reading comprehension process of Arabic readers, in which the segregability of Arabic writing system prepare the readers to emphasize some sensory inputs and ignore others based on their past reading experience.
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.