↓ Skip to main content

The Mediating Effect of Listening Metacognitive Awareness between Test-Taking Motivation and Listening Test Score: An Expectancy-Value Theory Approach

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Mediating Effect of Listening Metacognitive Awareness between Test-Taking Motivation and Listening Test Score: An Expectancy-Value Theory Approach
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02201
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jian Xu

Abstract

The present study investigated test-taking motivation in L2 listening testing context by applying Expectancy-Value Theory as the framework. Specifically, this study was intended to examine the complex relationships among expectancy, importance, interest, listening anxiety, listening metacognitive awareness, and listening test score using data from a large-scale and high-stakes language test among Chinese first-year undergraduates. Structural equation modeling was used to examine the mediating effect of listening metacognitive awareness on the relationship between expectancy, importance, interest, listening anxiety, and listening test score. According to the results, test takers' listening scores can be predicted by expectancy, interest, and listening anxiety significantly. The relationship between expectancy, interest, listening anxiety, and listening test score was mediated by listening metacognitive awareness. The findings have implications for test takers to improve their test taking motivation and listening metacognitive awareness, as well as for L2 teachers to intervene in L2 listening classrooms.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 6 15%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Lecturer 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 18 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 8 20%
Arts and Humanities 4 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Psychology 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 17 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,577,751
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,480
of 30,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#328,987
of 440,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#444
of 519 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,248 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,911 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 519 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.