MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087954317 · doi:10.1111/1540-4781.00197

Impact of Maintaining L1 Reading Skills on L2 Reading Skill Development in Adults: Evidence from Speakers of Serbo‐Croatian Learning French

2003· article· en· W2087954317 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Language Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)PsychologyCroatianTransfer of trainingLinguisticsLongitudinal studyCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clarke (1980) hypothesized that effective interlingual transfer of reading skills requires the attainment of some particular threshold of second language (L2) knowledge. Results from a study by Hacquebord (1989) suggested that the interlingual transfer of reading skills also requires active reading of the first language (L1). Results from a longitudinal study carried out over a 1‐year period with 52 Bosnians learning French as a L2 supported Clarke's hypothesis but were only partially in accord with Hacquebord's. Significant correlations between L1 and L2 reading performance for the subgroup of nonactive L1 readers suggested that failure to maintain L1 reading did not prevent the transfer of reading skills. However, the greater improvement in L2 reading ability by the active L1 readers than by the nonactive L1 readers suggested that maintaining L1 reading enhances the transfer of reading skills.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it