Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39654941›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

Understanding the role of cognitive constructs employed in reading in global math and science achievement.

Gökhan Arastaman, Metin Bulus, Hakkı Kontaş, Bahadır Özcan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. 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

4 authors.

Gökhan ArastamanDepartment of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.
Metin BulusDepartment of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Adiyaman University, Adıyaman, Türkiye.
Hakkı KontaşDepartment of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Adiyaman University, Adıyaman, Türkiye.
Bahadır ÖzcanDepartment of Child Development, Anamur Vocational School, Mersin University, Mersin, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We utilized PISA-2018 data from 71 countries to investigate the relationship between cognitive constructs employed in reading literacy (locating information, understanding, evaluating and reflecting, single and multiple thinking) and math and science achievement. We found that these cognitive constructs collectively accounted for 56% of the variance in math and 63% in science achievement, even after adjusting for gender, socioeconomic status, and country fixed effects. This means that the majority of cultural differences in math and science achievement (resulting from different education systems) can be explained by cognitive constructs employed in reading. We also noted that, at the country level, coefficients of cognitive constructs employed in reading demonstrated an interesting reconciliatory pattern. Countries with a weaker coefficient on the "locating information" dimension tended to have stronger coefficients on the "understanding" and "evaluation and reflection" dimensions; whereas, countries with a stronger coefficient on "understanding" dimension tended to have a weaker coefficient on "evaluation and reflection" dimension. These findings are particularly significant for STEM interventions aiming to enhance math and science achievement, as they indicate that a substantial portion of the variance in these achievements can be explained by cognitive constructs employed in reading literacy. Furthermore, culture-specific reconciliatory patterns imply that strengths in certain cognitive skills can compensate for weaknesses of others. Therefore, schools should consider modifying their curricula to integrate cognitive constructs employed in reading literacy more into math and science education.

Indexed as

academic performancecognitiongendermath literacyPISAreading literacyscience literacysocioeconomic status

Identifiers

PMID39654941
PMCPMC11626531

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.