Componentes metodológicos y estadísticos de estudios sobre intervenciones tecnológicas para mejorar la lectura: Revisión de literatura sistematizada
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Publicado
2024-06-01
Mario Esaul Bermonti-Pérez
Giselle Cordero-Arroyo
Christian E. De León-Casillas
Vicmarie Vargas Álvarez
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5228-2538
Resumen
El propósito de nuestra revisión fue examinar los componentes metodológicos y estadísticos de estudios sobre los efectos de intervenciones basadas en la tecnología sobre las destrezas de lectura. Realizamos una revisión sistematizada y analizamos 21 estudios para examinar estos componentes. Nuestros resultados sugieren que los estudios que abordan la eficacia de las intervenciones de lectura basadas en la tecnología emplean técnicas metodológicas y estadísticas moderadamente rigurosas, pese a que hay necesidad de mejoras. Futuros estudios deben implementar asignación aleatoria de participantes, balancear el orden de los procedimientos de medición e incorporar métodos estadísticos que estimen el tamaño del efecto de forma no sesgada y la incertidumbre de los hallazgos. La tecnología es flexible, poderosa y altamente atractiva para los niños, lo que la convierte en una vía ideal para explorar su integración en las estrategias de intervención convencionales.
##plugins.generic.articleMetricsGraph.articlePageHeading##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Keywords
Intervenciones computarizadas, revisión de literatura, lectura, intervenciones basadas en tecnología
References
Allen, M. (Ed). (2017). The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. Sage Publications.
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. (7th ed.). American Psychological Association.
Aro, M. (2013). Literacy acquisition from cross-linguistic perspectives. In R. Malatesha Joshi & P. G. Aaron (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 531–550). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203824719
Cameron, C., Turner, R. & Samaranayaka, A. (2021). Understanding confidence intervals and why they are so important. The New Zealand Medical Student Journal, 33(1), 42–43.
https://doi.org/10.57129/AGAG5939
Cazzell, S., Skinner, C. H., Ciancio, D., Aspiranti, K., Watson, T., Taylor, K., McCurdy, M., & Skinner, A. (2016). Evaluating a computer flash-card sight-word recognition intervention with self-determined response intervals in elementary students with intellectual disability. School Psychology Quarterly, 32(3), 367–378.
https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000172
Chai, Z. (2017). Improving early reading skills in young children through an iPad app: small-group instruction and observa-tional learning. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 36(2), 101–111.
https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870517712491
Comaskey, E. M., Savage, R. S., & Abrami, P. (2009). A randomized efficacy study of web-based synthetic and analytic programmes among disadvantaged urban kindergarten children. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(1), 92–108.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.01383.x
De León-Casillas, C. E., Bermonti-Pérez, M., & Moreno-Torres, M. A. (2020). Guía metodológica para una revisión de literatura. Revista Salud y Conducta Humana, 7(1), 24-38.
De León-Casillas, C. E., & Moreno-Torres, M. A. (2020). Marco teórico para una revisión de literatura sistemática. Revista Salud y Conducta Humana, 7(1), 10–23.
Dimitrov, D. M., & P Rumrill, P. D. Jr. (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measure-ment of change. Work, 20(1), 159-165.
Durlak, J. A. (2009). How to Select, Calculate, and Interpret Effect Sizes. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34(9), 917–928. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsp004
Ecalle, J., Kleinsz, N., & Magnan, A. (2013). Computer-assisted learning in young poor readers: The effect of grapho-syllabic training on the development of word reading and reading comprehend-sion. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1368–1376.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.041
Ecalle, J., Magnan, A., & Calmus, C. (2009). Lasting effects on literacy skills with a computer-assisted learning using syllabic units in low-progress readers. Computers and Education, 52(3), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.010
Elfil, M. & Negida, A. (2017). Sampling methods in clinical research; an educational review. Emergency (Tehran, Iran), 5(1).
Fan, M., Antle, A. N., Hoskyn, M., & Neustaedter, C. (2018). A design case study of a tangible system supporting young English language learners. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 18, 67–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.08.001
Graf, C., Wager, E., Alyson, B., Fiack, S., Diane Scott-Lichter, D. & Robinson, A. (2007). Best practice guidelines on publication ethics: A publisher’s perspective. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 61(152), 1-26.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2006.01230.x
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D. & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: Secrets of the trade. Clinical Update, 5(6), 101-117.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6
Gustafson, S., Fälth, L., Svensson, I., Tjus, T., & Heimann, M. (2011). Effects of three interventions on the reading skills of children with reading disabilities in grade 2. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219410391187
Hedges, L. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass' s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164588
Higgins, J. P., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (2008). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. En J. P. Higgins & S. Green (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions.
Howell, D. (2010). Statistical methods for psychology. (8th ed). Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Institute of Medicine. (2011). Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13059
Karemaker, A., Pitchford, N. J., & O'Malley, C. (2010). Enhanced recognition of written words and enjoyment of reading in struggling beginner readers through whole-word multimedia software. Computers and Education, 54(1), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.018
Kathryn-Horne, J. (2017). Reading Comprehension: A computerized intervention with primary-age poor readers. Dyslexia, 23(1), 119-140.
Kirk, R. E. (2012). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Kleinsz, N., Potocki, A., Ecalle, J., & Magnan, A. (2017). Profiles of French poor readers: Underlying difficulties and effects of computerized training pro-grams. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 45–57.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.05.009
Kyle, F., Kujala, J., Richardson, U., Lyytinen, H., & Goswami, U. (2013). Assessing the effectiveness of two theoretically motivated computer-assisted reading interventions in the United Kingdom: GG Rime and GG Phoneme. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(1), 61–76.
https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.038
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine, 6(7).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
Loannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PloS Medicine, 2(8), 696-701.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
Messer, D., & Nash, G. (2018). An evaluation of the effectiveness of a computer-assisted reading intervention. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(1), 140–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12107
Mishra, P., Pandey, C. M., Singh, S., Gupta, A. Sahu, C. & Keshri, A. (2019). Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statistical data. Ann Card Anaesth, 22(1), 67-72.
https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18
Montenegro‐Montero, A. & García‐Basteiro, A. L. (2019). Transparency and reproducibility: A step forward. Health Sciences Reports, 2(3).
https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.117
Moser, G. P., Morrison, T. G., & Wilcox, B. (2017). Supporting fourth-grade students' word identification using application software. Reading Psychology, 38(4), 349–368.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2016.1278414
Nuzzo, R. (2014). Statistical errors. Nature, 506(1), 150-153.
Norton, B. J. & Strube, M. J. (2001). Understanding Statistical Power. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 31(6), 307-515.
https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2001.31.6.307
O'Callaghan, P., McIvor, A., McVeigh, C., & Rushe, T. (2016). A randomized controlled trial of an early-intervention, computer-based literacy program to boost phonological skills in 4- to 6-year-old children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 546–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12122
Pindiprolu, S., & Forbush, D. (2009). Evaluating the promise of computer-based reading interventions with students with reading difficulties. Journal on School Educational Technology, 4(3), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.4.3.588
Potocki, A., Magnan, A., & Ecalle, J. (2015). Computerized trainings in four groups of struggling readers: Specific effects on word reading and comprehension. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 45–46, 83–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.07.016
Pourhoseingholi, A. M., Baghestani, A. R. & Vahedi, M. (2012). How to control con-founding effects by statistical analysis. Gastroenterology and Hepatology From Bed to Bench, 5(2), 79-83.
Reback, J., jbrockmendel, McKinney, W., Bossche, J. Van den, Augspurger, T., Cloud, P., Hawkins, S., gfyoung, Roeschke, M., Sinhrks, Klein, A., Petersen, T., Tratner, J., She, C., Ayd, W., Hoefler, P., Naveh, S., Garcia, M., Schendel, J., … Seabold, S. (2021). pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas 1.3.3. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.5501881
Rosas, R., Escobar, J. P., Ramírez, M. P., Meneses, A., & Guajardo, A. (2017). Impact of a computer-based intervention in Chilean children at risk of manifesting reading difficulties / Impacto de una intervención basada en ordenador en niños chilenos con riesgo de manifestar dificultades lectoras. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 40(1), 158–188.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2016.1263451
Saine, N. L., Lerkkanen, M. K., Ahonen, T., Tolvanen, A., & Lyytinen, H. (2010). Predicting word-level reading fluency outcomes in three contrastive groups: Remedial and computer-assisted remedial reading intervention, and mainstream instruction. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(5), 402–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.06.004
Schmitt, K. L., Hurwitz, L. B., Sheridan Duel, L., & Nichols Linebarger, D. L. (2018). Learning through play: The impact of web-based games on early literacy development. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 378–389.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.036
Schmitt, A. J., McCallum, E., Hawkins, R. O., Stephenson, E., & Vicencio, K. (2019). The effects of two assistive technologies on reading comprehension accuracy and rate. Assistive Technology, 31(4), 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2018.1431974
Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Davis, S. & Madden, N. A. (2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6(1), 1-26.
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104(1), 333-339.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Solheim, O. J., Frijters, J. C., Lundetræ, K., & Uppstad, P. H. (2018). Effectiveness of an early reading intervention in a semi-transparent orthography: A group randomised controlled trial. Learning and Instruction, 58, 65–79.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.05.004
Suresh, K. P. (2011). An overview of randomization techniques: An unbiased assessment of outcome in clinical research. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 4(1), 8-11.
http://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.82352
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. (2019). Reproducibility and replicability in science. The National Academies Press.
Turner, H. M. & Bernard, R. M. (2006). Calculating and synthesizing effect sizes. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders, 33(1), 42-55.
Wood, C. L., Mustian, A. L., & Lo, Y. yu. (2013). Effects of supplemental computer-assisted reciprocal peer tutoring on kindergarteners' phoneme segmentation fluency. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2013.0004
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. (7th ed.). American Psychological Association.
Aro, M. (2013). Literacy acquisition from cross-linguistic perspectives. In R. Malatesha Joshi & P. G. Aaron (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 531–550). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203824719
Cameron, C., Turner, R. & Samaranayaka, A. (2021). Understanding confidence intervals and why they are so important. The New Zealand Medical Student Journal, 33(1), 42–43.
https://doi.org/10.57129/AGAG5939
Cazzell, S., Skinner, C. H., Ciancio, D., Aspiranti, K., Watson, T., Taylor, K., McCurdy, M., & Skinner, A. (2016). Evaluating a computer flash-card sight-word recognition intervention with self-determined response intervals in elementary students with intellectual disability. School Psychology Quarterly, 32(3), 367–378.
https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000172
Chai, Z. (2017). Improving early reading skills in young children through an iPad app: small-group instruction and observa-tional learning. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 36(2), 101–111.
https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870517712491
Comaskey, E. M., Savage, R. S., & Abrami, P. (2009). A randomized efficacy study of web-based synthetic and analytic programmes among disadvantaged urban kindergarten children. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(1), 92–108.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.01383.x
De León-Casillas, C. E., Bermonti-Pérez, M., & Moreno-Torres, M. A. (2020). Guía metodológica para una revisión de literatura. Revista Salud y Conducta Humana, 7(1), 24-38.
De León-Casillas, C. E., & Moreno-Torres, M. A. (2020). Marco teórico para una revisión de literatura sistemática. Revista Salud y Conducta Humana, 7(1), 10–23.
Dimitrov, D. M., & P Rumrill, P. D. Jr. (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measure-ment of change. Work, 20(1), 159-165.
Durlak, J. A. (2009). How to Select, Calculate, and Interpret Effect Sizes. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34(9), 917–928. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsp004
Ecalle, J., Kleinsz, N., & Magnan, A. (2013). Computer-assisted learning in young poor readers: The effect of grapho-syllabic training on the development of word reading and reading comprehend-sion. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1368–1376.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.041
Ecalle, J., Magnan, A., & Calmus, C. (2009). Lasting effects on literacy skills with a computer-assisted learning using syllabic units in low-progress readers. Computers and Education, 52(3), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.010
Elfil, M. & Negida, A. (2017). Sampling methods in clinical research; an educational review. Emergency (Tehran, Iran), 5(1).
Fan, M., Antle, A. N., Hoskyn, M., & Neustaedter, C. (2018). A design case study of a tangible system supporting young English language learners. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 18, 67–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.08.001
Graf, C., Wager, E., Alyson, B., Fiack, S., Diane Scott-Lichter, D. & Robinson, A. (2007). Best practice guidelines on publication ethics: A publisher’s perspective. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 61(152), 1-26.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2006.01230.x
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D. & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: Secrets of the trade. Clinical Update, 5(6), 101-117.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6
Gustafson, S., Fälth, L., Svensson, I., Tjus, T., & Heimann, M. (2011). Effects of three interventions on the reading skills of children with reading disabilities in grade 2. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219410391187
Hedges, L. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass' s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164588
Higgins, J. P., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (2008). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. En J. P. Higgins & S. Green (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions.
Howell, D. (2010). Statistical methods for psychology. (8th ed). Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Institute of Medicine. (2011). Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13059
Karemaker, A., Pitchford, N. J., & O'Malley, C. (2010). Enhanced recognition of written words and enjoyment of reading in struggling beginner readers through whole-word multimedia software. Computers and Education, 54(1), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.018
Kathryn-Horne, J. (2017). Reading Comprehension: A computerized intervention with primary-age poor readers. Dyslexia, 23(1), 119-140.
Kirk, R. E. (2012). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Kleinsz, N., Potocki, A., Ecalle, J., & Magnan, A. (2017). Profiles of French poor readers: Underlying difficulties and effects of computerized training pro-grams. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 45–57.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.05.009
Kyle, F., Kujala, J., Richardson, U., Lyytinen, H., & Goswami, U. (2013). Assessing the effectiveness of two theoretically motivated computer-assisted reading interventions in the United Kingdom: GG Rime and GG Phoneme. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(1), 61–76.
https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.038
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine, 6(7).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
Loannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PloS Medicine, 2(8), 696-701.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
Messer, D., & Nash, G. (2018). An evaluation of the effectiveness of a computer-assisted reading intervention. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(1), 140–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12107
Mishra, P., Pandey, C. M., Singh, S., Gupta, A. Sahu, C. & Keshri, A. (2019). Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statistical data. Ann Card Anaesth, 22(1), 67-72.
https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18
Montenegro‐Montero, A. & García‐Basteiro, A. L. (2019). Transparency and reproducibility: A step forward. Health Sciences Reports, 2(3).
https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.117
Moser, G. P., Morrison, T. G., & Wilcox, B. (2017). Supporting fourth-grade students' word identification using application software. Reading Psychology, 38(4), 349–368.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2016.1278414
Nuzzo, R. (2014). Statistical errors. Nature, 506(1), 150-153.
Norton, B. J. & Strube, M. J. (2001). Understanding Statistical Power. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 31(6), 307-515.
https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2001.31.6.307
O'Callaghan, P., McIvor, A., McVeigh, C., & Rushe, T. (2016). A randomized controlled trial of an early-intervention, computer-based literacy program to boost phonological skills in 4- to 6-year-old children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 546–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12122
Pindiprolu, S., & Forbush, D. (2009). Evaluating the promise of computer-based reading interventions with students with reading difficulties. Journal on School Educational Technology, 4(3), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.4.3.588
Potocki, A., Magnan, A., & Ecalle, J. (2015). Computerized trainings in four groups of struggling readers: Specific effects on word reading and comprehension. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 45–46, 83–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.07.016
Pourhoseingholi, A. M., Baghestani, A. R. & Vahedi, M. (2012). How to control con-founding effects by statistical analysis. Gastroenterology and Hepatology From Bed to Bench, 5(2), 79-83.
Reback, J., jbrockmendel, McKinney, W., Bossche, J. Van den, Augspurger, T., Cloud, P., Hawkins, S., gfyoung, Roeschke, M., Sinhrks, Klein, A., Petersen, T., Tratner, J., She, C., Ayd, W., Hoefler, P., Naveh, S., Garcia, M., Schendel, J., … Seabold, S. (2021). pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas 1.3.3. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.5501881
Rosas, R., Escobar, J. P., Ramírez, M. P., Meneses, A., & Guajardo, A. (2017). Impact of a computer-based intervention in Chilean children at risk of manifesting reading difficulties / Impacto de una intervención basada en ordenador en niños chilenos con riesgo de manifestar dificultades lectoras. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 40(1), 158–188.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2016.1263451
Saine, N. L., Lerkkanen, M. K., Ahonen, T., Tolvanen, A., & Lyytinen, H. (2010). Predicting word-level reading fluency outcomes in three contrastive groups: Remedial and computer-assisted remedial reading intervention, and mainstream instruction. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(5), 402–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.06.004
Schmitt, K. L., Hurwitz, L. B., Sheridan Duel, L., & Nichols Linebarger, D. L. (2018). Learning through play: The impact of web-based games on early literacy development. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 378–389.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.036
Schmitt, A. J., McCallum, E., Hawkins, R. O., Stephenson, E., & Vicencio, K. (2019). The effects of two assistive technologies on reading comprehension accuracy and rate. Assistive Technology, 31(4), 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2018.1431974
Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Davis, S. & Madden, N. A. (2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6(1), 1-26.
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104(1), 333-339.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Solheim, O. J., Frijters, J. C., Lundetræ, K., & Uppstad, P. H. (2018). Effectiveness of an early reading intervention in a semi-transparent orthography: A group randomised controlled trial. Learning and Instruction, 58, 65–79.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.05.004
Suresh, K. P. (2011). An overview of randomization techniques: An unbiased assessment of outcome in clinical research. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 4(1), 8-11.
http://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.82352
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. (2019). Reproducibility and replicability in science. The National Academies Press.
Turner, H. M. & Bernard, R. M. (2006). Calculating and synthesizing effect sizes. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders, 33(1), 42-55.
Wood, C. L., Mustian, A. L., & Lo, Y. yu. (2013). Effects of supplemental computer-assisted reciprocal peer tutoring on kindergarteners' phoneme segmentation fluency. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2013.0004
Cómo citar
Componentes metodológicos y estadísticos de estudios sobre intervenciones tecnológicas para mejorar la lectura: Revisión de literatura sistematizada. (2024). Revista Puertorriqueña De Psicologia, 35(1), 108-122. https://doi.org/10.55611/reps.3501.10
Sección
Artículo de investigación
Si se acepta un trabajo para su publicación, los derechos de impresión y de reproducción por cualquier forma y medio son de la Asociación de Psicología de Puerto Rico (APPR), que no rechazará cualquier petición razonable por parte de los autores para obtener el permiso de reproducción de sus contribuciones. Debe adjuntarse una carta tipo de cesión de derechos. Se entiende que las opiniones expresadas en los artículos son de responsabilidad exclusiva de los autores y no comprometen la opinión y política científica de la Revista ni de la APPR. Igualmente, las actividades descritas en los trabajos publicados estarán de acuerdo con los criterios de ética, tanto por lo que se refiere a los trabajos con humanos como a la experimentación animal, así como en todo lo relativo a la ética profesional.
Cómo citar
Componentes metodológicos y estadísticos de estudios sobre intervenciones tecnológicas para mejorar la lectura: Revisión de literatura sistematizada. (2024). Revista Puertorriqueña De Psicologia, 35(1), 108-122. https://doi.org/10.55611/reps.3501.10