Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 141Reading and Literacy DevelopmentInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsLiteracy and Educational Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Enhancing digital reading performance with a collaborative reading annotation system

Chen, Chih-Ming, Chen, Fang-Ya·2014·Computers & Education
DOI 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.010
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.010

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Alexander, 1992, Assessing attitudes in middle and secondary schools and community colleges, Journal of Reading, 36, 146

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Chen, C.-M., & Chen, F.-Y.
Affiliations
National Chengchi University (TW)
Corresponding author
Chen, Chih-Ming
ORCID
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-08
Volume
77
Pages
67-81
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.010
OpenAlex
W2078252508
Cited by
141
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2
FWCI
18.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Literacy and Educational Practices
Keywords
digital reading, reading comprehension, reading annotation, interactive discussion, reading strategies, reading attitudes, elementary school students, screen-based reading, inferential comprehension, learning satisfaction

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.