L2 Reading Comprehension and Its Correlates: A Meta-Analysis

被引:292
作者
Jeon, Eun Hee [1 ]
Yamashita, Junko [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Pembroke, NC 28372 USA
[2] Nagoya Univ, Nagoya, Aichi 4648601, Japan
关键词
meta-analysis; correlations; L2 reading comprehension; moderator; componential view of reading; WORKING-MEMORY CAPACITY; SIMPLE VIEW; MORPHOLOGICAL AWARENESS; INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES; LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY; PROCESSING SKILLS; STRATEGY USE; PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS; VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE; 2ND-LANGUAGE;
D O I
10.1111/lang.12034
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
The present meta-analysis examined the overall average correlation (weighted for sample size and corrected for measurement error) between passage-level second language (L2) reading comprehension and 10 key reading component variables investigated in the research domain. Four high-evidence correlates (with 18 or more accumulated effect sizes: L2 decoding, L2 vocabulary knowledge, L2 grammar knowledge, first language [L1] reading comprehension), and six low-evidence correlates (L2 phonological awareness, L2 orthographic knowledge, L2 morphological knowledge, L2 listening comprehension, working memory, metacognition) were included in the study. For the four high-evidence correlates, a series of moderator analyses were also carried out to examine the effects of age, L2 proficiency, L1-L2 script and language distance, and measurement characteristics. The results showed that L2 grammar knowledge (r = .85), L2 vocabulary knowledge (r = .79), and L2 decoding (r = .56) were the three strongest correlates of L2 reading comprehension. The six low-evidence correlates had moderate-to-strong mean correlations, with L2 listening comprehension being the strongest correlate (r = .77) and metacognition (r = .32) being the weakest correlate. Age, some measurement characteristics, and L1-L2 language distance were found to be significant moderators for some reading components.
引用
收藏
页码:160 / 212
页数:53
相关论文
共 183 条
[1]   Not all reading disabilities are alike [J].
Aaron, PG ;
Joshi, M ;
Williams, KA .
JOURNAL OF LEARNING DISABILITIES, 1999, 32 (02) :120-137
[2]   Advantages of Bilinguals Over Monolinguals in Learning a Third Language [J].
Abu-Rabia, Salim ;
Sanitsky, Ekaterina .
BILINGUAL RESEARCH JOURNAL, 2010, 33 (02) :173-199
[3]  
Adams M.J., 1999, READING DEV TEACHING, P213
[4]  
Adams M.J., 1990, BEGINNING READ THINK
[5]   Should the simple view of reading include a fluency component? [J].
Adlof, Suzanne M. ;
Catts, Hugh W. ;
Little, Todd D. .
READING AND WRITING, 2006, 19 (09) :933-958
[6]  
Alderson J.C., 2000, ASSESSING READING
[7]  
Alderson J.C., 1984, READING FOREIGN LANG, P1
[8]  
ALDERSON JC, 1993, NEW DECADE OF LANGUAGE TESTING RESEARCH: SELECTED PAPERS FROM THE 1990 LANGUAGE TESTING RESEARCH COLLLOQUIUM, P203
[9]   Assessing the relationship of working memory to L2 reading: Does the nature of comprehension process and reading span task make a difference? [J].
Alptekin, Cem ;
Ercetin, Gulcan .
SYSTEM, 2009, 37 (04) :627-639
[10]  
ANGLIN JM, 1993, MONOGR SOC RES CHILD, V58, P1