The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2019.05.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reading self-efficacy and reading fluency development among primary school children: Does specificity of self-efficacy matter?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
29
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
2
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Children with high self‐efficacy benefited from the intervention more than the control group in word reading fluency, whereas children with low self‐efficacy benefited from the intervention less than the control group in spelling. The first finding is in accordance with the previous studies which suggest that high self‐efficacy is related to better reading skills (Carroll & Fox, 2017; Lee & Zentall, 2012; Peura et al, 2019) and can positively predict children's response to a reading intervention (Cho et al, 2015). However, it was somewhat unexpected that GL Reading players with poor self‐efficacy developed less than the control group in spelling.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Children with high self‐efficacy benefited from the intervention more than the control group in word reading fluency, whereas children with low self‐efficacy benefited from the intervention less than the control group in spelling. The first finding is in accordance with the previous studies which suggest that high self‐efficacy is related to better reading skills (Carroll & Fox, 2017; Lee & Zentall, 2012; Peura et al, 2019) and can positively predict children's response to a reading intervention (Cho et al, 2015). However, it was somewhat unexpected that GL Reading players with poor self‐efficacy developed less than the control group in spelling.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Self‐efficacy was assessed by asking the children to rate their confidence in performing successfully in various reading and spelling‐related tasks. The self‐efficacy scale was adapted from the scale developed by Peura et al (2019) and it included eight questions (e.g., How certain are you that you can say the names of all letters? How certain are you that you can read long words?).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this manner, perceived intensity of reading may be contemplated as having a greater role in influencing self-efficacy than the actual, objective rate of reading, a finding that is relevant to the present study as it is reliant on self-report measures of intensity of reading. Furthermore, a positive relationship has been established between reading fluency and learning-related self-efficacy (Peura et al, 2019). Additionally, Miyamoto, Pfost, and Artelt (2019) also found significant indirect mediating effects of reading amount on reading comprehension, alongside a link between intensity of reading and metacognitive awareness of strategies.…”
Section: Research Self-efficacy and Attitude Towards Researchmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Motivational processes, such as children's academic self-concept (Katzir et al 2008;Peura et al 2019;Susperreguy et al 2018), task value, including interest (Carroll et al 2019;Kirby et al 2011;McKenna et al 1995), and task-focused behavior (Georgiou et al 2013;Kiuru et al 2014;Mägi et al 2018) have been shown to play important roles in literacy acquisition in different languages. However, despite evidence showing that culture and writing system impact the cognitive bases of reading development (e.g., Georgiou et al 2012;Landerl et al 2019;McBride-Chang et al 2005;Moll et al 2014;Ziegler et al 2010), there is still paucity of research examining whether culture also modulates the relations between motivation and reading skills; of note, a recent meta-analysis examining the role of motivation in reading did not examine this either (Toste et al 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%