荷兰作者识别测试。
Dutch Author Recognition Test.
作者信息
Brysbaert Marc, Sui Longjiao, Dirix Nicolas, Hintz Florian
机构信息
Department of Experimental Psychology, Ghent University, BE.
Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, NL.
出版信息
J Cogn. 2020 Mar 24;3(1):6. doi: 10.5334/joc.95.
Abstract
Book reading shows large individual variability and correlates with better language ability and more empathy. This makes reading exposure an interesting variable to study. Research in English suggests that an author recognition test is the most reliable objective assessment of reading frequency. In this article, we describe the efforts we made to build and test a Dutch author recognition test (DART for older participants and DART_R for younger participants). Our data show that the test is reliable and valid, both in the Netherlands and in Belgium (split-half reliability over .9 with university students, significant correlations with language abilities) and can be used with a young, non-university population. The test is free to use for research purposes.
摘要
阅读书籍显示出很大的个体差异，并且与更好的语言能力和更强的同理心相关。这使得阅读接触成为一个值得研究的有趣变量。英语研究表明，作者识别测试是阅读频率最可靠的客观评估方法。在本文中，我们描述了我们为构建和测试荷兰作者识别测试（老年参与者用DART，年轻参与者用DART_R）所做的努力。我们的数据表明，该测试在荷兰和比利时都是可靠且有效的（大学生的分半信度超过0.9，与语言能力有显著相关性），并且可以用于年轻的非大学生群体。该测试可免费用于研究目的。
相似文献
1
Dutch Author Recognition Test.荷兰作者识别测试。
J Cogn. 2020 Mar 24;3(1):6. doi: 10.5334/joc.95.
2
Development and assessment of the Korean Author Recognition Test.韩国作者识别测试的开发与评估。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 Jul;72(7):1837-1846. doi: 10.1177/1747021818814461. Epub 2018 Nov 29.
3
Some students are more equal: Performance in Author Recognition Test and Title Recognition Test modulated by print exposure and academic background.一些学生更平等：印刷品曝光和学术背景对作者识别测试和标题识别测试的表现的影响。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Sep;56(6):6004-6019. doi: 10.3758/s13428-023-02330-y. Epub 2024 Jan 9.
4
Applicability of the Compensatory Encoding Model in Foreign Language Reading: An Investigation with Chinese College English Language Learners.补偿编码模型在外语阅读中的适用性：以中国大学英语学习者为对象的一项调查
Front Psychol. 2017 May 4;8:681. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00681. eCollection 2017.
5
[The estimation of premorbid intelligence levels in French speakers].[法语使用者病前智力水平的评估]
Encephale. 2005 Jan-Feb;31(1 Pt 1):31-43. doi: 10.1016/s0013-7006(05)82370-x.
6
Non-native listeners' recognition of high-variability speech using PRESTO.非母语听众使用PRESTO对高变异性语音的识别。
J Am Acad Audiol. 2014 Oct;25(9):869-92. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.25.9.9.
7
[Dementia and the Dutch Reading Tests for Adults].
Tijdschr Gerontol Geriatr. 1996 Dec;27(6):250-4.
8
Predicting word decoding and word spelling development in children with Specific Language Impairment.预测特定语言障碍儿童的单词解码和单词拼写能力发展
J Commun Disord. 2011 May-Jun;44(3):392-411. doi: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2010.12.002. Epub 2010 Dec 25.
9
A predictive study of reading comprehension in third-grade Spanish students.一项关于三年级西班牙语学生阅读理解能力的预测性研究。
Psicothema. 2013;25(2):199-205. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2012.175.
10
Reliability and validity of the computerized Revised Token Test: comparison of reading and listening versions in persons with and without aphasia.计算机化修订代币测验的信度和效度：失语症患者与非失语症患者阅读版和听力版的比较
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2015 Apr;58(2):311-24. doi: 10.1044/2015_JSLHR-L-13-0030.
引用本文的文献
1
The German Auditory and Image (GAudI) vocabulary test: A new German receptive vocabulary test and its relationships to other tests measuring linguistic experience.德国听觉与图像（GAudI）词汇测试：一项新的德语接受性词汇测试及其与其他衡量语言经验的测试之间的关系。
PLoS One. 2025 Apr 28;20(4):e0318115. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318115. eCollection 2025.
2
Individual differences in online research: Comparing lab-based and online administration of a psycholinguistic battery of linguistic and domain-general skills.在线研究中的个体差异：比较基于实验室和在线方式施测的一套语言及领域通用技能的心理语言学测试。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Dec 19;57(1):22. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02533-x.
3
Using Psychometric Network Analysis to Examine the Components of Spoken Word Recognition.运用心理测量网络分析来检验口语单词识别的组成部分。
J Cogn. 2024 Jan 10;7(1):10. doi: 10.5334/joc.340. eCollection 2024.
4
Unipolar IRT and the Author Recognition Test (ART).单极 IRT 和作者识别测试（ART）。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Sep;56(6):5406-5423. doi: 10.3758/s13428-023-02275-2. Epub 2023 Nov 16.
5
Effects of individual differences in text exposure on sentence comprehension.文本暴露的个体差异对句子理解的影响。
Sci Rep. 2023 Oct 5;13(1):16812. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-43801-8.
6
IDLaS-NL - A platform for running customized studies on individual differences in Dutch language skills via the Internet.IDLaS-NL - 一个通过互联网运行针对荷兰语技能个体差异的定制研究的平台。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Mar;56(3):2422-2436. doi: 10.3758/s13428-023-02156-8. Epub 2023 Sep 25.
7
No Correlation Between Articulation Speed and Silent Reading Rate when Adults Read Short Texts.成年人阅读短文时，发音速度与默读速度之间无相关性。
Psychol Belg. 2023 Jul 17;63(1):82-91. doi: 10.5334/pb.1189. eCollection 2023.
8
Testing the validity of a self-report scale, author recognition test, and book counting as measures of lifetime exposure to print fiction.测试自我报告量表、作者识别测试和书籍计数作为衡量一生接触印刷小说的有效性。
Behav Res Methods. 2023 Jan;55(1):103-134. doi: 10.3758/s13428-021-01784-2. Epub 2022 Mar 11.
9
Protocol of the Healthy Brain Study: An accessible resource for understanding the human brain and how it dynamically and individually operates in its bio-social context.健康大脑研究协议：一个用于理解人类大脑及其在生物社会背景下如何动态且独特运作的可获取资源。
PLoS One. 2021 Dec 29;16(12):e0260952. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260952. eCollection 2021.
10
Effects of Print Exposure on an Online Lexical Decision Task: A Direct Replication Using a Web-Based Experimental Procedure.印刷物暴露对在线词汇判断任务的影响：使用基于网络的实验程序进行的直接复制研究。
Front Psychol. 2021 Aug 11;12:710663. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.710663. eCollection 2021.
本文引用的文献
1
Individual differences in syntactic processing: Is there evidence for reader-text interactions?句法处理中的个体差异：是否有读者与文本互动的证据？
J Mem Lang. 2018 Oct;102:155-181. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.006. Epub 2018 Jun 27.
2
Development and assessment of the Korean Author Recognition Test.韩国作者识别测试的开发与评估。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 Jul;72(7):1837-1846. doi: 10.1177/1747021818814461. Epub 2018 Nov 29.
3
Experience, aptitude and individual differences in native language ultimate attainment.母语最终水平的经验、能力和个体差异。
Cognition. 2018 Sep;178:222-235. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.05.018. Epub 2018 Jun 7.
4
Beyond the 30-Million-Word Gap: Children's Conversational Exposure Is Associated With Language-Related Brain Function.超越 3000 万词汇差距：儿童的对话接触与语言相关的大脑功能有关。
Psychol Sci. 2018 May;29(5):700-710. doi: 10.1177/0956797617742725. Epub 2018 Feb 14.
5
Mapping the Early Language Environment Using All-Day Recordings and Automated Analysis.使用全天录音和自动分析绘制早期语言环境图。
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017 May 17;26(2):248-265. doi: 10.1044/2016_AJSLP-15-0169.
6
Does a single session of reading literary fiction prime enhanced mentalising performance? Four replication experiments of Kidd and Castano (2013).单次阅读文学小说能否提升心理理论能力？基德和卡斯塔诺（2013年）的四项重复实验。
Cogn Emot. 2018 Feb;32(1):130-144. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2017.1279591. Epub 2017 Jan 17.
7
Does reading a single passage of literary fiction really improve theory of mind? An attempt at replication.阅读一段文学小说真的能提高心理理论吗？一项复制尝试。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2016 Nov;111(5):e46-e54. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000064. Epub 2016 Sep 19.
8
How Many Words Do We Know? Practical Estimates of Vocabulary Size Dependent on Word Definition, the Degree of Language Input and the Participant's Age.我们认识多少单词？基于单词定义、语言输入程度和参与者年龄的词汇量实际估算
Front Psychol. 2016 Jul 29;7:1116. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01116. eCollection 2016.
9
Taking Perspective: Personal Pronouns Affect Experiential Aspects of Literary Reading.换位思考：人称代词影响文学阅读的体验层面。
PLoS One. 2016 May 18;11(5):e0154732. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154732. eCollection 2016.
10
Reading ability and print exposure: item response theory analysis of the author recognition test.阅读能力与印刷品接触：作者识别测试的项目反应理论分析
Behav Res Methods. 2015 Dec;47(4):1095-1109. doi: 10.3758/s13428-014-0534-3.
Zotero 插件