The DOI matches its Crossref record; 195 of the 195 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse with Coh-Metrix
Abstract
Coh-Metrix is among the broadest and most sophisticated automated textual assessment tools available today. Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse with Coh-Metrix describes this computational tool, as well as the wide range of language and discourse measures it provides. Part I of the book focuses on the theoretical perspectives that led to the development of Coh-Metrix, its measures, and empirical work that has been conducted using this approach. Part II shifts to the practical arena, describing how to use Coh-Metrix and how to analyze, interpret, and describe results. Coh-Metrix opens the door to a new paradigm of research that coordinates studies of language, corpus analysis, computational linguistics, education, and cognitive science. This tool empowers anyone with an interest in text to pursue a wide array of previously unanswerable research questions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
ASPECTS OF THE THEORY OF SYNTAX
Chomsky, N. (1964) · doi:10.21236/ad0616323 · Cited by 13,587
Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research
Rayner, K. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372 · Cited by 7,979
Building a Large Annotated Corpus of English: The Penn Treebank
Marcus, M. (1993) · doi:10.21236/ada273556 · Cited by 7,405
Actual Minds, Possible Worlds.
Mergler, N., Schleifer, R., & Bruner, J. (1986) · MLN · doi:10.2307/2905728 · Cited by 6,609
Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.104.2.211 · Cited by 6,282
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315836010 · Cited by 6,082
Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories
Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9 · Cited by 5,933
Strategies of Discourse Comprehension
Staczek, J. J., van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1985) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/326517 · Cited by 5,395
Flesch, R. (1948) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0057532 · Cited by 5,391
Cited by
Let’s not forget: Learning analytics are about learning
Gašević, D., Dawson, S., & Siemens, G. (2015) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-014-0822-x · Cited by 1,049
Artificial intelligence for education: Knowledge and its assessment in AI-enabled learning ecologies
Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., & Searsmith, D. (2021) · Educational Philosophy and Theory · doi:10.1080/00131857.2020.1728732 · Cited by 518
Measuring Syntactic Complexity in L2 Writing Using Fine‐Grained Clausal and Phrasal Indices
KYLE, K., & CROSSLEY, S. A. (2018) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12468 · Cited by 405
Link, S., Mehrzad, M., & Rahimi, M. (2022) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2020.1743323 · Cited by 275
Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2014) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006 · Cited by 274
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- McNamara, D. S., Graesser, A. C., McCarthy, P. M., & Cai, Z.
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2014-03-24
- OpenAlex
- W1536274117
- Cited by
- 892
- References
- 195
- FWCI
- 25.01
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse with Coh-Metrix. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511894664
- The paper
- McNamara, D. S., Graesser, A. C., McCarthy, P. M., & Cai, Z. (2014). Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511894664
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.
