ArticleBehavior research methods2025
Dictation and vocabulary knowledge tests for adult native Chinese readers.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- C-VLT: A reliable Chinese Vocabulary Levels Test for primary and secondary school learners.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- CLAP: A battery of measures to estimate language proficiency in native Chinese speakers.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Aging Reduces the Efficiency of Parafoveal Lexical Activation During Chinese Sentence Reading.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
- Reading fluency and word segmentation agreement modulate the benefits of word boundary cues for older readers in traditional Chinese.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To examine how individual differences in language skills affect language processing, it is essential to have good-quality tests that can assess such individual differences accurately. This study introduces a dictation test and a vocabulary knowledge test in Chinese, which aim to measure lexical expertise in proficient Chinese language users like university students. The psychometric properties of the two tests were examined with two groups of participants. In the first group, exploratory factor analyses confirmed that each of these tests was unidimensional, measuring a single underlying construct of lexical expertise. After removing some problematic items, the two tests also demonstrated satisfactory internal reliabilities. Although the test scores were only weakly correlated with self-reported measures of language proficiency, the correlation with word recognition performance was moderate. These results were successfully replicated with the second cross-validation group, confirming the reliability and convergent validity of the tests. An additional dataset further showed that the vocabulary test score was positively correlated with sentence comprehension performance. Taken together, the tests have acceptable psychometric quality and can serve as tools for examining individual differences in Chinese language processing. The tests are freely available online, and normative performance data are provided, facilitating their use in future research.
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.