Department of Special Needs Education, University of Oslo.
Department of Educational Research, University of Oslo.
Psychol Bull. 2014 Mar;140(2):409-33. doi: 10.1037/a0033890. Epub 2013 Aug 12.
We report a systematic meta-analytic review of studies comparing reading comprehension and its underlying components (language comprehension, decoding, and phonological awareness) in first- and second-language learners. The review included 82 studies, and 576 effect sizes were calculated for reading comprehension and underlying components. Key findings were that, compared to first-language learners, second-language learners display a medium-sized deficit in reading comprehension (pooled effect size d = -0.62), a large deficit in language comprehension (pooled effect size d = -1.12), but only small differences in phonological awareness (pooled effect size d = -0.08) and decoding (pooled effect size d = -0.12). A moderator analysis showed that characteristics related to the type of reading comprehension test reliably explained the variation in the differences in reading comprehension between first- and second-language learners. For language comprehension, studies of samples from low socioeconomic backgrounds and samples where only the first language was used at home generated the largest group differences in favor of first-language learners. Test characteristics and study origin reliably contributed to the variations between the studies of language comprehension. For decoding, Canadian studies showed group differences in favor of second-language learners, whereas the opposite was the case for U.S. studies. Regarding implications, unless specific decoding problems are detected, interventions that aim to ameliorate reading comprehension problems among second-language learners should focus on language comprehension skills.
我们对比较第一语言和第二语言学习者阅读理解及其底层成分(语言理解、解码和语音意识)的研究进行了系统的元分析综述。该综述包括 82 项研究,计算了阅读理解和底层成分的 576 个效应量。主要发现是,与第一语言学习者相比,第二语言学习者在阅读理解方面表现出中等程度的缺陷(综合效应量 d = -0.62),在语言理解方面表现出较大程度的缺陷(综合效应量 d = -1.12),但在语音意识(综合效应量 d = -0.08)和解码(综合效应量 d = -0.12)方面差异较小。一项调节分析表明,与阅读理解测试类型相关的特征可靠地解释了第一语言和第二语言学习者阅读理解差异的变化。对于语言理解,来自低社会经济背景的样本和仅在家中使用第一语言的样本的研究产生了有利于第一语言学习者的最大组间差异。测试特征和研究来源可靠地促成了语言理解研究之间的差异。对于解码,加拿大的研究表明第二语言学习者具有群体差异,而美国的研究则相反。关于其影响,除非检测到特定的解码问题,否则旨在改善第二语言学习者阅读理解问题的干预措施应侧重于语言理解技能。