MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327716478 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v13n3p172

Reading Comprehension and Behavior in Children Using E-books vs. Printed Books

2023· article· en· W4327716478 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)Reading comprehensionMathematics educationControl (management)ScheduleComprehensionElectronic bookPsychologyComputer scienceAffect (linguistics)MultimediaPedagogyLinguisticsCommunicationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research is to investigate the influence that personalized, gamified, and PDF electronic reading practices have on the attitudes which fifth-grade students possess toward e-reading experiences, as well as how these stances affect the students' motivation and reading comprehension while they are learning English as a second/foreign language (EFL). For the purpose of the study, there were a total of 84 fifth-grade kids from public schools in Greece, who participated. These students were split up into three different experimental groups and a control one. Participants in the experimental groups read throughout the treatment period according to a preset schedule using one of three diverse electronic reading formats (PDF, gamified, or customized), whilst participants in the control group read utilizing a paper guided reading plan. The participants' experiences playing video games online were analyzed via a technique called the quasi-experimental approach. According to the findings of the research, the experimental group and the control group did not significantly vary from one another in terms of their levels of reading comprehension. On the other hand, in comparison to the participants in the control group, those who took part in the experiments reported having more favorable sentiments regarding their electronic reading experiences and were more inspired to read. As indicated from the research findings, kids may experience an increase in their desire to read when they use electronic gadgets. This study has implications for educators and policymakers as they consider incorporating digital reading practices into their teaching methods, particularly when it comes to improving students' motivation to read.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.291 · 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