MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400174342 · doi:10.5539/elt.v17n7p94

The Correlation of Field Cognitive Style and Working Memory Capacity with English Reading Strategy of Second Language Learners

2024· article· en· W4400174342 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

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLearning Styles and Cognitive Differences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyReading (process)Cognitive styleFluencyWorking memoryVocabularyCognitive psychologyReading comprehensionCognitionMetacognitionLinguisticsMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding written text is crucial in language acquisition, and the cognitive style and working memory capacity of an individual play crucial roles in determining their level of reading comprehension. Individual differences may result in different reading strategies being employed during the reading process. Research has demonstrated that cognitive style and working memory capacity can impact language learning outcomes like vocabulary acquisition, grammar comprehension, and speaking fluency. However, there is a lack of research on how these cognitive factors relate to the reading strategies utilized by English as a second Language learners. The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between Field-Independent and Field-Dependent (FI/FD) cognitive styles and working memory capacity in relation to the utilization of English reading strategies among freshmen engineering majors at BIPT. Data is gathered utilizing the theoretical model of FI/FD cognitive styles, working memory capacity and English reading strategies. The collected data includes results from the Cognitive Style Figure Test (CSFT), Reading Span Test, and a questionnaire on English reading strategies, which are then analyzed using SPSS 22.0. The findings from the thorough analysis show that there exists a notable relationship between working memory capacity and the utilization of reading strategies in relation to FI/FD cognitive styles. Students exhibiting an FI cognitive style tend to favor the implementation of cognitive and metacognitive strategies, whereas those with an FD style are inclined towards employing social/affective strategies. Additionally, disparities in the use of reading strategies are observed between students with high and low working memory capacity. Students with high working memory capacity demonstrate a higher tendency to employ cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, and social/emotional strategies when compared to those with low memory capacity.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.264 · 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