Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 450

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparing Theories of Language Learning Strategies: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Hsiao, Tsung–Yuan, Oxford, Rebecca L.·2002·The Modern Language Journal

Abstract

This study compared classification theories of language learning strategies. Results from confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the data measured by the ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning and collected from 517 college EFL learners indicated that of the strategy theories examined, Oxford's 6–factor strategy taxonomy is the most consistent with learners’ strategy use, although this model did not produce a fully adequate fit to the data. The findings suggest that other possible approaches to strategy classification should be considered. These approaches include (a) differentiating strategies for using a language (“language use strategies”) from strategies for learning it (“language learning strategies”), (b) recognizing the importance of the learning environment, (c) slightly modifying the prevalent strategy classification theories by reclassifying particular strategies, (d) ensuring that the language skills are obvious in each strategy item, and (e) creating a task–based strategy inventory. This study also illustrates how CFA can be applied to the comparison of current strategy theories.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1540-4781.00155

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 52 references

Metadata

Authors
Hsiao, T., & Oxford, R. L.
Venue
The Modern Language Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-09
Volume
86
Issue
3
Pages
368-383
ISSN
  • 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-4781
OpenAlex
W2151412647
Cited by
450
References
52
FWCI
49.89
Type
journal article
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: Comparing Theories of Language Learning Strategies: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1540-4781.00155
The paper
Hsiao, T., & Oxford, R. L. (2002). Comparing Theories of Language Learning Strategies: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The Modern Language Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00155

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.