Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 220

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

English-as-a-Second-Language Learners' Cognitive Reading Processes: A Review of Research in the United States

Fitzgerald, Jill·1995·Review of Educational Research

Abstract

An integrative review of United States research on English-as-a-second-language (ESL) learners’ cognitive reading processes suggested that, on the whole, ESL readers recognized cognate vocabulary fairly well, monitored their comprehension and used many metacognitive strategies, used schema and prior knowledge to affect comprehension and recall, and were affected differently by different types of text structures. In the main, where United States ESL readers’ processes appeared to be used differently from those of native English readers, the differences were in speed and depressed activation of selected processes. Significantly, overall, the findings from the studies suggested a relatively good fit to preexisting reading theories and views generally thought to describe native-language readers. However, the quantitative differences between processes of ESL readers and those of native English readers indicated that the preexisting theories and views might need to be revisited and elaborated to address a subset of factors special to ESL learners.

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 · 10.2307/1170711

Cites

3 of 3 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

Metadata

Authors
Fitzgerald, J.
Venue
Review of Educational Research
Published
1995
Volume
65
Issue
2
Pages
145
ISSN
0034-6543 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2114066795
Cited by
220
References
3
FWCI
4.45
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

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.