| Literature DB >> 34899520 |
Zhilong Xie1, Wei Wang1, Xiaying Chu1, Qing Qiu2, Fangfang Yuan1, Jinwen Huang1, Meijing Chen1.
Abstract
The study investigates whether learners' demographics (e.g., age, education, and intelligence-IQ), language learning experience, and cognitive control predict Chinese (L2) reading comprehension in young adults. Thirty-four international students who studied mandarin Chinese in mainland China (10 females, 24 males) from Bangladesh, Burundi, Congo, Madagascar, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, and Zimbabwe were tested on a series of measures including demographic questionnaires, IQ test, two cognitive control tasks [Flanker Task measuring inhibition and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) measuring mental set shifting], and a Chinese reading comprehension test (HSK level 4). The results of correlation analyses showed that education, L2 learning history, L2 proficiency, and previous category errors of the WCST were significantly correlated with Chinese reading comprehension. Further multiple regression analyses indicated that Chinese learning history, IQ, and previous category errors of the WCST significantly predicted Chinese reading comprehension. These findings reveal that aside from IQ and the time spent on L2 learning, the component mental set shifting of cognitive control also predicts reading outcomes, which suggests that cognitive control has a place in reading comprehension models over and above traditional predictors of language learning experience.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese as a foreign/second language; Chinese reading comprehension; L2 learning experience; cognitive control; demographics
Year: 2021 PMID: 34899520 PMCID: PMC8657595 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.770579
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Descriptive data of participants’ background information.
|
| Minimum | Maximum | Mean |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 34 | 20.00 | 27.00 | 22.79 | 1.72 |
| Education (years) | 34 | 15.00 | 23.00 | 17.62 | 2.09 |
| SES (1–7) | 34 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.15 | 0.66 |
| IQ (0–72) | 34 | 26.00 | 70.00 | 55.91 | 9.61 |
| L1 Proficiency (1–10) | 34 | 5.00 | 10.00 | 9.15 | 1.18 |
| L2-Chinese Learning History (years) | 34 | 1.00 | 7.00 | 3.41 | 1.80 |
| L2 Listening Proficiency (1–10) | 34 | 2.00 | 8.00 | 6.76 | 1.92 |
| L2 Speaking Proficiency (1–10) | 34 | 1.00 | 9.00 | 4.74 | 2.08 |
| L2 Reading Proficiency (1–10) | 34 | 1.00 | 9.00 | 4.82 | 2.60 |
| L2 Writing Proficiency (1–10) | 34 | 1.00 | 8.00 | 4.79 | 2.51 |
| L2 Reading Comprehension (1–40) | 34 | 4.00 | 40.00 | 24.50 | 11.93 |
Descriptive data of cognitive control among participants.
|
| Minimum | Maximum | Mean | SD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Congruent | 34 | 427 | 877 | 584 | 122.52 |
| Neutral | 34 | 436 | 943 | 599 | 111.97 |
| Incongruent | 34 | 455 | 1,062 | 634 | 120.35 |
| Inhibition | 34 | −128 | 244 | 50 | 62.75 |
|
| |||||
| RTs | 33 | 997 | 3,720 | 1,873 | 565 |
| Completed categories | 33 | 1.00 | 12.00 | 5.21 | 2.62 |
| Overall errors | 33 | 36.00 | 98.00 | 65.64 | 15.16 |
| Perseverative errors | 33 | 14.00 | 75.00 | 44.70 | 16.08 |
| Previous category errors | 33 | 12.00 | 62.00 | 35.76 | 13.08 |
Pearson Correlations between demographic variables and L2 Chinese reading comprehension.
| – | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Age | – | 0.441 | −0.026 | −0.245 | −0.078 |
| 2. Education | – | −0.178 | −0.058 |
| |
| 3. SES | − | −0.262 | −0.025 | ||
| 4. IQ | – | 0.260 | |||
| 5. L2 Chinese Reading Comprehension | – |
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed). The bold indicates the analysis focus.
Pearson Correlations between language background and L2 Chinese reading comprehension.
| – | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. L1 Language Proficiency (1–10) | – | 0.113 | −0.104 | −0.058 | −0.149 | −0.041 | −0.125 |
| 2. L2 Learning History (years) | – | 0.663 | 0.759 | 0.677 | 0.701 |
| |
| 3. L2 Chinese Listening Proficiency (1–10) | – | 0.855 | 0.749 | 0.731 |
| ||
| 4. L2 Chinese Speaking Proficiency (1–10) | – | 0.821 | 0.803 |
| |||
| 5. L2 Chinese Reading Proficiency (1–10) | – | 0.938 |
| ||||
| 6. L2 Chinese Writing Proficiency (1–10) | – |
| |||||
| 7. L2 Chinese Reading Comprehension | – |
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). The bold indicates the analysis focus.
Pearson Correlations between cognitive control and L2 Chinese reading comprehension.
| – | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Flanker Congruent | – | 0.897 | 0.867 | −0.290 | 0.492 | −0.199 | 0.285 | 0.303 | 0.286 | −0.281 |
| 2. Flanker Neutral | – | 0.950 | 0.105 | 0.458 | −0.123 | 0.254 | 0.285 | 0.166 | −0.279 | |
| 3. Flanker Incongruent | – | 0.226 | 0.398 | −0.242 | 0.354 | 0.393 | 0.253 | −0.325 | ||
| 4. Flanker Inhibition | – | −0.137 | −0.113 | 0.177 | 0.220 | −0.036 | −0.074 | |||
| 5. WCST RTs | – | −0.103 | 0.154 | 0.125 | −0.060 | 0.082 | ||||
| 6. Overall Errors | – | −0.812 | 0.973 | 0.702 | −0.270 | |||||
| 7. Completed Categories | – | −0.744 | −0.523 | 0.190 | ||||||
| 8. Perseverative Errors | – | 0.770 | −0.292 | |||||||
| 9. Previous Category Errors | – |
| ||||||||
| 10. L2 Chinese Reading Comprehension | – |
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed).
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). The bold indicates the analysis focus.
Results of multiple regression analyses on Chinese reading comprehension.
| Model |
| Adjusted |
| Sig. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression | 0.891 | 0.795 | 0.773 | 37.417 | .000 | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| L2 Learning History | 5.220 | 0.584 | 0.775 | 8.939 | 0.000 | |||||
| Intelligence (IQ) | 0.309 | 0.108 | 0.253 | 2.875 | 0.007 | |||||
| Previous category errors | −0.207 | 0.082 | −0.227 | −2.529 | 0.017 | |||||
Predictors: (Constant), L2 Chinese learning history, IQ, and WCST previous category errors.