ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Exploring the pretraining effect in learning classical Chinese reading skills.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Prosodic regularity and reader reception in three-word rhyming couplets: a four-pronged investigation ofFrontiers in psychology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reading Chinese classical texts is very challenging, even for native speakers of Chinese. This study investigated the pretraining effect (established in cognitive theory of multimedia learning and cognitive load theory) in reading classical Chinese texts by young learners of Chinese as the first language. A 3 × 2 factorial design was adopted with pretraining activities modes (thematic pretraining, linguistic pretraining, and no pretraining) and levels of expertise (two levels of relative proficiency in classical Chinese reading comprehension) as independent variables and with reading comprehension performance and cognitive load ratings as dependent variables. 129 Year-6 (less proficient) students and 151 Year-8 (more proficient) students were randomly allocated to three instructional conditions. It was found that the more proficient Chinese learners in the two pretraining groups outperformed the more proficient learners in the no pretraining group, and the thematic pretraining condition led to better learning outcomes and lower cognitive load ratings than the linguistic pretraining condition. For the less proficient participants, the thematic pretraining condition had lower cognitive load ratings and better learning outcomes than no pretraining conditions. The results were discussed from the perspective of cognitive load theory.
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.