Media print exposure did not differ between the ER and no-ER groups at any point, though both groups changed over time¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Chi-square showed no statistical difference between the two groups in media reading (ads, e-mail, Internet, magazines, newspapers) at the three moments of the study. → Rodrigo 2014 q3 i? A MANCOVA repeated measures analysis showed a significant change over time in media print exposure but no interaction between time and approach and no group or language difference. → Rodrigo 2014 (2)

Evidence¶

Rodrigo 2014¶

Rodrigo, V., Greenberg, D., & Segal, D. (2014). Changes in reading habits by low literate adults through extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 26(1), 73-91. http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Chi-square analyses of survey items on frequency of reading ads, e-mail, Internet, magazines, and newspapers (never/sometimes/frequently) at pre, post, and follow-up; no group or language differences were found. Magazines, newspapers, and advertisements were the most-read categories.

"Chi Square did not show any statistical difference between the two groups at the three moments of the study (p > .05) for any of the 'media' readings. Nor was there a difference when the language variable was considered."

Rodrigo 2014 (2)¶

Rodrigo, V., Greenberg, D., & Segal, D. (2014). Changes in reading habits by low literate adults through extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 26(1), 73-91. http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl

q3 · i? · causal · r2

MANCOVA repeated measures on a composite media print exposure score with group as independent variable and language as covariate. The article reports F(1,102) = 8.512, p = .004 for time, with no time-by-approach interaction or group difference (Eta = .077, power = .824); no standardized effect size for the null contrasts is printed, so no magnitude is coded.

"These figures show a significant change of the two groups over time, F(1,102) = 8.512, p = .004, but there was neither interaction between time and approach nor difference between the instructional groups or language groups, Eta = .077, power = .824."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Home Learning Environment — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Both groups began the study with a positive attitude toward reading and maintained it, with no group difference — related
• Low literate adults in an extensive reading intervention read more books than no-ER peers after treatment and at 6-month follow-up — related
• The ER group showed more bookstore and library visiting than the no-ER group, with the library difference significant at follow-up — related
• The ER group developed book-completion behavior after treatment, and the difference persisted at 6-month follow-up — related