Cited by 138EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningWriting and Handwriting Education

Writing task complexity, students’ motivational beliefs, anxiety and their writing production in English as a second language

Rahimi, Muhammad, Zhang, Lawrence Jun·2019·Reading and Writing

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11145-018-9887-9

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 80 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J.
Affiliations
University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
Zhang, Lawrence Jun
Venue
Reading and Writing
Published
2018-07-20
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
761-786
ISSN
  • 0922-4777 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-0905
OpenAlex
W2883604886
Cited by
138
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
23.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Reading and Writing (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
Keywords
task complexity, writing anxiety, second language writing, argumentative essay writing, syntactic complexity, writing accuracy, subordination, Cognition Hypothesis, trade-off hypothesis, ESL learners

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review