↓ Skip to main content

Text-fading based training leads to transfer effects on children's sentence reading fluency

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Text-fading based training leads to transfer effects on children's sentence reading fluency
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00119
Pubmed ID
Authors

Telse Nagler, Sebastian P. Korinth, Janosch Linkersdörfer, Jan Lonnemann, Björn Rump, Marcus Hasselhorn, Sven Lindberg

Abstract

Previous studies used a text-fading procedure as a training tool with the goal to increase silent reading fluency (i.e., proficient reading rate and comprehension). In recently published studies, this procedure resulted in lasting reading enhancements for adult and adolescent research samples. However, studies working with children reported mixed results. While reading rate improvements were observable for Dutch reading children in a text-fading training study, reading fluency improvements in standardized reading tests post-training attributable to the fading manipulation were not detectable. These results raise the question of whether text-fading training is not effective for children or whether research design issues have concealed possible transfer effects. Hence, the present study sought to investigate possible transfer effects resulting from a text-fading based reading training program, using a modified research design. Over a period of 3 weeks, two groups of German third-graders read sentences either with an adaptive text-fading procedure or at their self-paced reading rate. A standardized test measuring reading fluency at the word, sentence, and text level was conducted pre- and post-training. Text level reading fluency improved for both groups equally. Post-training gains at the word level were found for the text-fading group, however, no significant interaction between groups was revealed for word reading fluency. Sentence level reading fluency gains were found for the text-fading group, which significantly differed from the group of children reading at their self-paced reading routine. These findings provide evidence for the efficacy of text-fading as a training method for sentence reading fluency improvement also for children.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 9 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 33%
Social Sciences 4 12%
Neuroscience 4 12%
Computer Science 1 3%
Design 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,804,483
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,069
of 29,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,864
of 357,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#308
of 422 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,702 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 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 357,447 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 422 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.