Strategy-use scores showed no significant correlation with reading scores in the cognitive and social/affective groups¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1 · q2 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i0 In the cognitive group, TOTALAVE did not correlate with reading scores (r = .041, p = .831). → Mahdiyeh Seyed Beheshti Nasab & Seyyed Fariborz Pishdadi Motlagh 2015 q2 i0 In the social/affective group, TOTALAVE did not correlate with reading scores (r = .065, p = .733). → Mahdiyeh Seyed Beheshti Nasab & Seyyed Fariborz Pishdadi Motlagh 2015 (2)

Evidence¶

Mahdiyeh Seyed Beheshti Nasab & Seyyed Fariborz Pishdadi Motlagh 2015¶

Mahdiyeh Seyed Beheshti Nasab & Seyyed Fariborz Pishdadi Motlagh. (2015). A Complete Review for Metacognitive, Cognitive, and Social/Affective Strategies as Essential Components of Learning strategies and their relationships with EFL Learners' Reading Comprehension Promotion. Advances in Language and Literary Studies. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.6n.3p.166

q2 · i0 · causal · r1

Pearson correlation between TOTALAVE and reading scores in the cognitive group (N=30); Table 10 prints r = .041, p = .831. The article concludes "there is no relationship"; equivalence was not tested.

"According to data which was found of Pearson correlation p=0.83 and more than 0.05 and r=0.04, so null hypothesis is approved and alternative one would be rejected and accordingly between the two variables there is no relationship."

Mahdiyeh Seyed Beheshti Nasab & Seyyed Fariborz Pishdadi Motlagh 2015 (2)¶

Mahdiyeh Seyed Beheshti Nasab & Seyyed Fariborz Pishdadi Motlagh. (2015). A Complete Review for Metacognitive, Cognitive, and Social/Affective Strategies as Essential Components of Learning strategies and their relationships with EFL Learners' Reading Comprehension Promotion. Advances in Language and Literary Studies. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.6n.3p.166

q2 · i0 · causal · r1

Pearson correlation between TOTALAVE and reading scores in the social/affective group (N=30); Table 26 prints r = .065, p = .733. No significant relationship was found.

"Table 26 shows that based on the Pearson correlation results, p=0.733 and it is above 0.05 significant level, so null hypothesis is approved and alternative hypothesis is rejected; furthermore, there is not meaningful differences among learners' reading scores in social-affective group."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In the social/affective strategy group, age showed no relationship with reading scores (r = .083, p = .663) — related
• Upper-intermediate EFL learners trained with metacognitive strategies achieved the highest reading scores among the three strategy groups — related
• No significant sex differences in reading scores emerged in any of the three strategy groups — related