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 |
Strategic Processing of Chinese Young English Language Learners in an International Standardized English Language Test
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01020 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Feifei Han |
| Abstract |
Strategic competence is acknowledged to be able to explain variations in language test performance. Research with adult language test-takers has shown that strategic competence has dual components: strategic knowledge and strategic processing. Of the two components, strategic processing, which is state-like, unstable, and tends to fluctuate from contexts to contexts, is more closely related to language test performance. To date, none of the existing studies investigates strategic processing with children English language learners (ELLs) and explores the relationship between strategic processing in all the four skills of language learning and the test performance. Addressing these gaps, the current study examined the nature of strategic processing in listening, reading and writing, and speaking of 138 Chinese young ELLs in an international standardized English language test - Cambridge Young Learners English Tests - Flyers test. The three questionnaires regarding strategic processing were administered to the participants immediately following the completion of the test. The confirmatory factor analyses verified that the strategic processing construct in the four skills comprised of a cognitive and a metacognitive dimensions, which resembles the strategic processing of the adult language test-takers. The participants adopted significantly more metacognitive than cognitive strategies consistently in the three sections of the test, possibly due to the status of the test. Both cognitive and metacognitive strategic processing were moderately related to the test performance, explaining from 7 to 31% of the variance in the total shields of the test. Across the four skills, high-performing test-takers used both cognitive and metacognitive strategies more frequently than the moderate- and low-performing test-takers, even though whether such differences were due to their richer strategic knowledge or processing skills was unknown. The study contributes to strategic processing in language testing literature and also provides practical implications for English trainers of the young ELLs in China. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Researcher | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 15 | 58% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Linguistics | 6 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 12% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 15 | 58% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,633,675
of 23,083,773 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,610
of 30,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,251
of 329,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#606
of 709 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,083,773 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,444 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 329,140 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 709 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.