ArticleBehavior research methods2026
CLAP: A battery of measures to estimate language proficiency in native Chinese speakers.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to increasing interest in investigating the effects of individual differences in language proficiency on word recognition, there is a growing need for objective, reliable, and valid proficiency measures for adult native speakers. While such measures are available for English (Andrews & Hersch, 2010), few comparable instruments are available for simplified Chinese, hindering rigorous investigation into individual differences in word recognition. To address this, we developed Chinese Language Assessments of Proficiency (CLAP). CLAP can be completed within 30 min and comprises: (1) a dictation test with 20 short-answer questions, (2) a vocabulary knowledge test with 30 multiple-choice questions, and (3) a reading comprehension test with 24 multiple-choice questions. Test development proceeded in two phases. In Phase 1, test items were developed and pilot-tested with 50 native Chinese participants. Item response theory analyses were performed to select items for the final tests. In Phase 2, the final tests were validated among 200 participants. The three tests demonstrated good reliability (McDonald's ω and Cronbach's α > 0.8), acceptable test homogeneity (average interitem correlations: .17 - .29), and good convergent validity, evidenced by significant, positive correlations with scores on two validation measures: (1) LEXTALE-CH, a character-based proficiency test (Chan & Chang, 2018); and (2) Hanyu Shuiping Kaoshi, a test assessing grammar, vocabulary and reading skills (HSK official website). Exploratory Factor Analyses demonstrated that CLAP tests and validation measures all loaded onto a single factor. CLAP provides a practical tool for studying individual differences in language proficiency or screening participants based on proficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42086810What 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.