2018
DOI: 10.1177/1747021818814461
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and assessment of the Korean Author Recognition Test

Abstract: This research reports the development and evaluation of a Korean Author Recognition Test (KART), designed as a measure of print exposure among young adults. Based on the original, English-language version of the Author Recognition Test (ART), the KART demonstrates significant relationships with offline measures of language ability, as well as online measures of word recognition. In particular, KART scores were related to participants’ responses on the Comparative Reading Habits (CRH) checklist, suggesting that… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

6
31
1
4

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
6
31
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The ART employed in experiments 1 and 2 was validated using an undergraduate sample (Acheson et al, 2008), but there is significant variation in language experience across cultures of the USA. Indeed, application of the ART to different cultures requires careful selection of author names to create a valid and meaningful measure of reading experience (e.g., Chen & Fang, 2015;Lee et al, 2019;Masterson & Hayes, 2007). One measure of fiction reading experience may therefore capture many different kinds of language experiences between samples, even for participants with the same ART score.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ART employed in experiments 1 and 2 was validated using an undergraduate sample (Acheson et al, 2008), but there is significant variation in language experience across cultures of the USA. Indeed, application of the ART to different cultures requires careful selection of author names to create a valid and meaningful measure of reading experience (e.g., Chen & Fang, 2015;Lee et al, 2019;Masterson & Hayes, 2007). One measure of fiction reading experience may therefore capture many different kinds of language experiences between samples, even for participants with the same ART score.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ART was intended to measure a participant’s print exposure (Moore & Gordon, 2015; Stanovich & West, 1989; West et al, 1993). Following Lee et al (2019), we first selected the 145 most popular author names according to book popularity ratings in Dangdang (the largest online book seller in mainland China). We first carried out a pretest by having 105 participants (from the same population as the main experiment participants) to decide whether or not a name (out of the 145 author names above plus 40 non-author names) referred to an author.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main disadvantage of the ART is that the familiarity with author names differs between cultures. Therefore, the ART has been adapted for different cultures, including Chinese (Chen and Fang, 2015), Dutch (Brysbaert et al, 2020), German (Grolig et al, 2020b), and Korean (Lee et al, 2019). Also, the popularity of authors changes over comparatively short time spans.…”
Section: Author Recognition Testmentioning
confidence: 99%