You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices Regarding the Role of Executive Functions in Reading and Arithmetic
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01567 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shirley Rapoport, Orly Rubinsten, Tami Katzir |
| Abstract |
The current study investigated early elementary school teachers' beliefs and practices regarding the role of Executive Functions (EFs) in reading and arithmetic. A new research questionnaire was developed and judged by professionals in the academia and the field. Reponses were obtained from 144 teachers from Israel. Factor analysis divided the questionnaire into three valid and reliable subscales, reflecting (1) beliefs regarding the contribution of EFs to reading and arithmetic, (2) pedagogical practices, and (3) a connection between the cognitive mechanisms of reading and arithmetic. Findings indicate that teachers believe EFs affect students' performance in reading and arithmetic. These beliefs were also correlated with pedagogical practices. Additionally, special education teachers' scored higher on the different subscales compared to general education teachers. These findings shed light on the way teachers perceive the cognitive foundations of reading and arithmetic and indicate to which extent these perceptions guide their teaching practices. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 8 | 47% |
| Unknown | 9 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 94% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 22 | 37% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 12% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 7% |
| Linguistics | 4 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 13 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2018.
All research outputs
#2,129,161
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,174
of 30,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,272
of 315,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#85
of 447 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,006 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,551 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 447 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.