The Relationship Between Cognitive Style of Impulsivity and Display, Referential, and Inferential Reading Comprehension Questions Among Iranian EFL University Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was an attempt to study the relationship between cognitive style of impulsivity and performance of the intermediate EFL university students on display, referential and inferential reading comprehension questions. The participants in this study were 100 sophomore students. They were given a reading comprehension test battery containing six passages and Eysenck Impulsiveness questionnaire. The results revealed that there was no significant difference between Low, Medium and High impulsives with respect to their performance in Display, Referential, and Inferential reading comprehension questions. Key words: Cognitive style; Impulsivity; EFL students; Reading comprehension questions Resume La presente etude visait a etudier la relation entre le style cognitif de l'impulsivite et la performance des etudiants de niveau intermediaire universitaires EFL sur l'ecran, referentielles et inferentielles des questions de comprehension de lecture. Les participants a cette etude etaient de 100 eleves etudiant en deuxieme annee. Ils ont recu une batterie de test de comprehension en lecture contenant six passages et le questionnaire d'Eysenck impulsivite. Les resultats ont revele qu'il n'y avait pas de difference significative entre impulsives Low, Medium et High a l'egard de leurs performances en affichage, referentielle et inferentielle des questions de comprehension de lecture. Mots cles: Style cognitif; Impulsivite; Etudiants d’EFL; Questions de comprehension de lecture
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".