不同閱讀流暢指標與四年級學童閱讀理解的關係
96
0
0
全文
(2)
(3) ! !. ! !. I!.
(4) ! !. !. 4% 12%. 23%. 16%. 6%. 2% 26%. 9%. !. !. ! !. !. !. II!.
(5) The Relationship Between Different Indicators Of Reading Fluency And Fourth Grade Students’ Reading Comprehension Summary This study aimed to explore the relationship between four different indicators of reading fluency (rapid naming, sight word fluency, fluency of connected texts, and fluency of disconnected texts)and reading comprehension of students in fourth grade. The participants were 156 fourth graders drawn from two elementary schools in Pingtung City. The students took the Chinese Character Recognition Test and The Reading Comprehension Growth Test in their classroom. Then each student completed The Rapid Naming Test, The Sight Words Fluency Test, Fluency Test of Connected Texts, and Fluency Test of Disconnected Texts individually. The reading rates were calculated for the four fluency tests. A series of multiple regression analyses were conducted. The main findings are as follows: 1. The four indices significantly predicted reading comprehension individually. Rapid naming speed explained 4% of the variance of reading comprehension, sight words fluency explained 12% of the variance, connected texts reading speed explained 23 % of the variance, and disconnected texts reading speed explained 16% of the variance. However, after the variance of Chinese character recognition were accounted for, only connected texts reading speed and disconnected texts reading speed predicted reading comprehension significantly, !. III!.
(6) with 6% and 2% of total variance were explained. 2. When entered into the equation altogether, the four indices of fluency predicted reading comprehension significantly, with 26% of variance explained.. After the. variance of Chinese character recognition were accounted for, the four indices still predicted reading comprehension significantly, with 9% of total variance explained. Only connected reading speed and rapid naming explained reading comprehension significantly. 3. After the other three indices of fluency were accounted for, only connected texts reading speed and disconnected texts reading speed had unique contribution to reading comprehension. On the other hand, after Chinese character recognition and the other three indices of fluency were accounted for, only connected texts reading speed and rapid naming had unique contributions to reading comprehension. !. Keywords: fourth grade, reading comprehension, reading fluency!. !. IV!.
(7) !. V!.
(8) !. VI!.
(9) ! !. VII!.
(10) ! !!! !. ! ! ! ! !. Trelease. Programme for International Student Assessment, PISA. !. 1!.
(11) !. Gunning, 2003; Meyer & Felton, 1999 Reading First Torgesen, 2002 Laberge. Samuels. automaticity. theory. Mckenna. Stahl 2003 White 1995. Shaywitz 2003. LaBerge & Samuels, 1974. !. 2!.
(12) Kuhn & Stahl, 2000. White, 1995 Chard,. Vaughn, & Tyler, 2002; Kuhn & Stahl, 2003; National Reading Panel, 2000 Chall 1966. prereading. decoding. fluency. confirmation and. reading for learning the new multiple viewpoints. construction and. reconstruction confirmation and fluency stage. learning to read reading to learn. Stanovich 1986. Matthew effects. Chall !. fourth-grade-slump 3!.
(13) National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP. 45% Lee, J.; Grigg, W.; Dion, G.,. 2007. Fuchs, Marston, & Shin, 2001. van den Broek, Espin,. Deno. 2003. Georgiou, Parrila. !. Liao. 4!.
(14) Catts 2001. sight-word reading. McCormick, 1995. Kim. Petscher, 2010; Klauda. Deno, 2003. !. 5!. Guthrie, 2008; Van den Broek, Espin,.
(15) !. ! ! !. ! ! ! ! !. ! ! ! !. 6!.
(16) ! ! reading fluency. !. 7!.
(17) reading comprehension. A3. !. 8!.
(18) Chinese character recognition !!!!. word recognition. increment. !. 9!. !.
(19) ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !. 10!.
(20) ! !. Stahl, 2004. Carver, 1992; Freese, 1997. Hudson Lane. Pullen. 2005. Kuhn & Stahl, 2003 Stahl rate. Meyer. Felton 1999. Kuhn 2002 Perfetti. Richek Caldwell Jennings. 2002. sight. words accuracy !. Lerner. 11!.
(21) speed. Mckenna. Stahl 2003. Mckenna. Stahl 2003. National Assessment of Educational Progress NAEP. Stahl & Kuhn, 2002 ; Tindal, 2006 decoding automaticity. prosody. Kuhn & Stahl,. 2003. music Hudson Lane & Pullen 2005 Kuhn & Stahl 2000. reading fluency accuracy. prosody. !. speed / rate. 12!.
(22) Klauda Guthrie 2008 Gough. Tunmer 1986 Kuhn & Stahl 2003. Schwaneflugel Hamilton Kuhn Wisenbaker. Stahl 2004. ! ! ! ! ! Gagné comprehension. decoding inferential comprehension. comprehension monitoring. !. 13!. literal.
(23) matching. recoding. lexical access parsing mental dictionaries. integration. summarization. elaboration. macro. goal-setting !. 14!. strategy.
(24) selection. goal checking. remediation. Gagne Mckenna. Stahl 2003. reasoning. LaBerge. reading comprehension. Samuels. 1974. Kuhn Stahl 2000 National Reading Panel, 2000; Rasinski & Hoffman, 2003. !. 15!.
(25) Samuels, 1994 Adams, 1990; Stanovich, 1984. LaBerge Samuels. Samuels. 1994 orientation of sensory receptors Samuels. 1994. alertness selectivity. limit capacity. !. 16!.
(26) Samuels, 1994. Samuels 1979 Mayer, 2008, p. 63. !. 17!.
(27) LaBerge. Samuels. 1974. Mayer, 2008, 21p. 61. Samuels, 1994; Stanovich, 1980. Stanovich. !. 1980. interactive-compensatory. 18!.
(28) Chall. Chall. Ehri. 1979. 1983. 1996 Chall & Indrisano, 1995;. Kuhn & Stahl, 2003. Carnine, et al., 2004; Chall, 1983. Chall. Carnine, et al., 2004; Indrisano & Chall, 1995; Kuhn & Stahl, 2003. prereading stage. spoken lauguage words / vocabulary. syntax. pretend reading !. 19!.
(29) conventional literacy stage / beginning of formal reading instruction. confirmation and fluency / ungluing from print. comfort. !. 20!.
(30) reading for learning the new information. multiple viewpoints stage. construction and reconstruction stage. !. 21!.
(31) Chall. Chall, Jacobs, & Baldwin, 1990; Kuhn & Stahl, 2003. Michael Pressley. Reading Instruction That Works Pressley,. 2006 Schatschneider, Fletcher, Francis, Carlson. Foorman. 2004. Klauda & Guthrie, 2008 Allington, 1983; Samuels, 1988; Schreiber, 1991. Ehri knowledge of the alphabetic system. !. 22!.
(32) Ehri, 2005. Ehri Kuhn & Stahl, 2003 p. 414. Ehri 2005. Ehri Beech, 2005; Ehri, 2005; Kuhn & Stahl, 2003. Chall 1983. pre alphabetic phases Chall. partial alphabetic phases. !. 23!.
(33) full alphabetic phases. Chall. consolidated alphabetic phases Chall. Ehri 2005. Perfetti. 1992 Kuhn & Stahl, 2004, .. 415. Chall Ehri. !. 24!.
(34) Mckenna. ! !!!! Wolf, 1999. Geschwind. 1965. Geschwind Geschwind Wolf. !. Bowers 1999. 25!. Stahl 2003.
(35) Blachman. 1994. Torgesen. Wagner. Rashotte Wolf. Bowers 2000. Wolf. Bowers. 1999, 2000. double-deficit hypothesis. Wolf. Wolf. Bowers. Bowers 1999, 2000 Wolf 1999. !. 26!. 2000. 1994.
(36) characters. rapid automatized naming, RNA Geschwind. Geschwind Wolf. & Bowers, 1999. !. Geschwind. Denckla. 27!. Rudel.
(37) Korhonen 1995 9. 18 Swanson. 1989 2008. Bowers. Wolf. Biddle 2000. 1998 1997 1999. !. 28!. 2000. 2001.
(38) 200mm×130mm. Wolf 1999. Wolf. Bowers. 1999, 2000. Bowers. Swanson. Cutting. Carlisle. Denckla. Rudel. 1991 Denckla. 1998. Wolf. !. 29!. 1974 1976 1986.
(39) Katzir. Catts, Fey, Tomblin et al., 2002; Catts, Fey, Zhang et al., 1999 !. 30!.
(40) sight word McCormick, 1995 Stoodt 1989. good reader poor reader occipitotmeporal. OT. inferior frontal gyrus parieto-tem- poral system OT. Shaywitz, 2003 Carr, Brown,. Vavrus, & Evans, 1990 !. IFG. Carr 31!.
(41) 1990. Slosson Oral Reading Test SORT SORT. 2007a OT. !!!!. B1 B2 B34 B57 B89. !. 32!.
(42) Van den Broek, Espin,. Deno. 2003. Hudson, Lane, & Pullen, 2005. White, 1995. Rasinski, T. V., Blachowicz, C. L., & Lems, K., 2012. Mckenna. Stahl 2003. Mastropieri, Leinart, & Scruggs, 1999. !. 33!.
(43) WPM. WCPM. Ashcraft, 2002. Long & De Ley, 2000 Saenz. !. 34!. Fuchs 2002.
(44) Jenkins, Fuchs, Van Den Broek, Espin, Deno. 2003. Bie- miller, 1977–1978; Doehring, 1976; Perfetti, Finger, & Hoga- boam, 1978; Stanovich, 1980 Jenkins, Fuchs, Van Den Broek, Espin, Deno, 2003 !. 35!.
(45) Posner and Snyder , 1975. Vukovic, Wilson, & Nash, 2004. Jenkins, Fuchs, Van Den Broek, Espin,. !. 36!. Deno. 2003.
(46) Klauda. Guthrie 2008. Kim, Petscher, Schatschneider,. !. Foorman 2010. 37!. 12,536.
(47) nonsense words. 24.5%. Jenkins, Fuchs, Van Den Broek, Espin, Deno 2003. !. 38!.
(48) !. ! !. !!!! ! ! !. ! ! ! ! ! 1,1. !. 1,2. !. 1,3. !. 1,4. !. 1,5 ! 1,6 ! 1,7 ! 1,8. !. 39!.
(49) ! ! ! 2,1 ! 2,2 ! ! ! 3,1 ! 3,2 ! 3,3 ! 3,4 ! 3,5 ! 3,6 ! 3,7 ! !. 40!.
(50) 3,8 ! !. ! ! !!!! 85. 71. 156. !. !!!! !. ! ! ! !!!! ! !. ! ! ! (A3) A3. !. 41!.
(51) ! ! !!!. 2008. 30. 200. .99. .81~.95 .36~.76. .48~.67. ! ! !!!! !. ! ! !. 42!. .99.
(52) /. !. !. 14 A4. !. 43!.
(53) 14 A4. 14. A4. !. 79. 1200. 3,1 !. !!!!! 3,1. ! !. ! ! !. !. !. !. 359!. 11.25!. 97.5!. !. 283!. 7.45!. 97.6!. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !. !. 44!.
(54) ! ! ! !!!!. ! ! ! !!!!. /. ! !!!!. 1 2. !. ! !!!!. !. !!!. 30 !. 45!. !.
(55) !!!!!. !. 40 ! !!!!. ! !!!!. !. 46!. !.
(56) ! !!!!. !. ! ;! ! ! !!!!. !. ! ;! ! ! !!!. !. !. 47!.
(57) !. !! !. !. 48!.
(58) !. !. 49!.
(59) !. 50!.
(60) !. !. ! !!!!. ! !. ! !!!!. !. 4,1 23.16 7.59. 2008 20.14 4.23. 68.11. 18.65 2011. 157.10. 4,1!. !. ! !. !. !. !. !. !. 10!. 36!. 24.33!. 6.10!. !. 50!. 174!. 105.03!. 23.09!. 8!. 37!. 17.67!. 4.40!. 49!. 186!. 107.03!. 23.40!. !. 103!. 385!. 201.05!. 50.25!. !. 60!. 233!. 115.54!. 29.73!. ! !. ! !. 34.60. 51!.
(61) ! !!!! ! ! !!!!. 4,2 !. !!!! p<.01. .41 .21 r=.49. .70. .49. r=.48. r=.40. r=.35 !. 4,2. n=156 !. ! 1. 2.. ! !. 3. 4.. !. 1!. 2!. 3!. 4!. 5!. 6!. 1!. !. !. !. !. !. 0.488**!. 1!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. ,0.208**! ,0.413**! 1! !. 0.352**!. 0.607**!. ,0.617**! 1!. !. !. 5.. ! ! 0.475**!. 0.571**!. ,0.582**! 0.698**!. 1!. !. 6.. ! 0.394**!. 0.557**!. ,0.666**! 0.684**!. 0.638**!. 1!. **p<.01! !. 52!.
(62) ! !!!!. 4,3. F. p<.01. 24% 4%. 12%. 23% 16% !. ! 4,3!. ! !. Beta!. t!. R2 !. F. .49!. 6.94***!. .24!. 48.21***!. ,.21!. ,2.64**!. .04!. 6.945**!. !. .35!. 4.67***!. .12!. 21.81***!. !. .48!. 6.70***!. .23!. 44.75***!. !. .39!. 5.33***!. .16!. 28.37***!. ! !. !. **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! !!!!. VIF. 4,4 4,5 4,6 4,7. 10 F 6% 2% !. !. 53!.
(63) 4,4! !. ! !. Beta!. t!. R2 !. R2 !. F. !. VIF!. 1!. !. .49!. 6.94***! .24!. .24!. 48.21***!. 1.00!. 2!. !. .49!. 6.26***! .24.!. .00!. .01!. 1.21!. ,.01!. ,.10!. !. ! ***p<.001! ! 4,5! !. ! !. Beta!. t!. R2 !. R2 !. F. !. VIF!. 1!. !. .49!. 6.94***! .24!. .24!. 48.21***!. 1.00!. 2!. !. .44!. 4.91***! .24!. .01!. 1.0!. 1.58!. .09!. 1.00!. !. !. !. ! ***p<.001! ! 4,6!. ! !. !. Beta!. t!. R2 !. R2 !. F. !. VIF!. 1!. !. .49!. 6.94***! .24!. .24!. 48.21***!. 1.00!. 2!. !. .32!. 3.90***! .30!. .06!. 12.34**!. 1.48!. .29!. 3.51**!. !. !. !. !. **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! ! ! !. 54!.
(64) 4,7!. ! !. !. Beta!. t!. R2 !. R2 !. F. !. VIF!. 1!. !. .49!. 6.94***! .24!. .24!. 48.21***!. 1.00!. 2!. !. .39!. 4.65***! .26!. .02!. 4.51*!. 1.45!. .18!. 2.12*!. !. !. !. ! *p<.05! ! ***p<.001! ! !. ! !!!!. 4,8 VIF. 10 F. p<.001 26% ! ! 4,8!. !!!!!!!!!! !. F. ! VIF!. t!. R2 !. .22!. 2.25*!. !. !. !. !. .01!. .10!. .27!. .26!. 13.58***! 2.50!. !. .43!. 4.14***!. 2.21!. !. .26!. 2.41*!. 2.41!. !. *p<.05! ! ***p<.001! !. R2 !. Beta!. 55!. 2.02!.
(65) !!!!. 4,9. VIF 10 24%. F. p<.01 9% !!!. ! 4,9! !. ! !. Beta!. t!. R2 !. R2 !. F. ! VIF!. 1!. !. .49!. 6.94***! .24!. !. 48.21***! 1.00!. 2!. !. .32!. 3.62***! !. !. !. 1.77!. .19!. 2.03*!. .33!. .09!. 4.72**!. 2.04!. !. ,.10!. ,.88!. !. !. .35!. 3.45**!. 2.31!. !. .19!. 1.74!. 2.51!. !. 2.70!. *p<.05! ! **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! ! !!!!. !. ! 4,10. 56!.
(66) VIF. 10 1. 24%. F. p<.05. R2. .03 ! ! 4,10!. !. !. ! Beta! t!. 1!. R2 !. R2 !. F. ! VIF!. !. ,.04! ,.35!. !. !. !. !. .40!. 3.78**!. .24!. .24!. 15.99***! 2.16!. !. .17!. 1.67!. .22!. 2.25**!. !. !. !. 2.02!. !. .01!. .10!. .27!. .03!. 5.05*!. 2.50!. !. .43!. 4.14**!. 2.21!. !. .26!. 2.40*!. 2.41!. !. 2!. 2.40!. !. 2.08!. *p<.05! ! **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! !!!!. 4,11. VIF. 10 26%. !. 57!.
(67) .01. !!!!. ! 4,11!. !. !. ! Beta! t! !. 1!. 2!. R2 !. R2 !. F. ! VIF!. .22!. 2.28*!. !. !. !. !. .44!. 4.63***!. .26!. .26!. 18.22***! 1.82!. !. .26!. 2.58*!. !. .01!. .10!. !. !. !. 2.50!. .22!. 2.25*!. .27!. .01!. .01!. 2.02!. !. .43!. 4.14***!. 2.21!. !. .26!. 2.40*!. 2.41!. !. 1.94!. !. 2.17!. *p<.05! ! ***p<.001! !!!!!!!!! !!!!. 4,12. VIF 10 18% F p<.001. 9% !. ! ! !. 58!.
(68) 4,12!. !. !. !. ! VIF!. R2 !. .20!. 1.92!. !. !. !. .16!. 1.53*!. .18!. .18!. 11.19***! 1.97!. !. .36!. 3.24**!. !. !. .43!. 4.14***! !. !. !. .22!. 2.24*!. .09!. 17.17***! 2.02!. !. .01!. 0.10!. 2.50!. !. .26!. 2.40*!. 2.41!. !. 2!. F. t!. !. 1!. R2 !. Beta!. !. .27!. 2.06!. 2.30! 2.21!. *p<.05! ! **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! !!!!. 4,13. VIF. 10 24% F. p<.01. 3% !. ! ! ! ! !. 59!.
(69) 4,13!. !. !. !. 1!. Beta!. t!. R2 !. !. .10!. .90!. !. !. .49!. 4.73***! .24!. .24!. 15.68***! 2.10!. .13!. 1.43!. !. .27!. 2.41*!. !. !. !. 2.41!. .22!. 2.25*!. .27!. .03!. 5.79**!. 2.02!. !. .01!. .10!. 2.50!. !. .43!. 4.14***!. 2.21!. !. *p<.05! ! **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! 4,14. VIF. 10. 31% F. p<.05. 2%. !. ! ! ! ! !. ! VIF!. !. !. !!!!. F. !. ! 2!. R2 !. 60!. 2.25!. 1.74!.
(70) 4,14!. !. !. ! Beta! !. 1!. R2 !. R2 !. F. ! VIF!. .34!. 3.76***! !. !. !. !. ,.15!. ,1.33!. .31!. 16.57***! 2.58!. !. .32!. 3.12**!. 2.24!. !. .10!. 1.04!. 2.15!. .32!. 3.62***! !. !. !. 1.77!. .19!. 2.03*!. !. !. !. 2.04!. !. ,.10!. ,.88!. .32!. .02!. 4.11*!. 2.70!. !. .35!. 3.45**!. 2.31!. !. .19!. 1.74!. 2.51!. !. 2!. t!. !. .31!. 1.75!. *p<.05! ! **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! ! !!!!. 4,15. VIF. 10. 32% .00 ! ! !. 61!. !.
(71) 4,15. !. !. !. .30!. 3.51**!. !. !. !. .21!. 2.27*!. .32!. .32!. 17.77***! 1.94!. !. .32!. 3.36**!. 2.05!. !. .16!. 1.57!. 2.35!. .32!. 3.62***! !. !. !. 1.77!. ,.10!. ,.88!. !. !. !. 2.70!. .19!. 2.03*!. .32!. .00!. .77!. 2.04!. !. .35!. 3.45**!. 2.31!. !. .19!. 1.74!. 2.51!. ! ! !. *p<.05! ! **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! !!!!. 4,16. VIF. 10. 27% F 5%. p<.01 !. ! ! !. ! VIF!. R2 !. !. 2!. F. t!. !. 1!. R2 !. Beta!. 62!. 1.64!.
(72) 4,16. !. !. ! Beta! !. 1!. R2 ! F. R2 !. ! VIF!. .39!. 4.29***! !. !. !. .14!. 1.40!. .27!. 13.95***! 1.98!. !. .03!. .30!. 2.39!. !. .25!. 2.29*!. 2.43!. .32!. 3.62***! !. !. !. 1.77!. .35!. 3.45**!. !. !. !. 2.31!. .20!. 2.03*!. .32!. .05!. 11.92**!. 2.04!. !. .,.10!. ,.88!. 2.70!. !. .19!. 1.74!. 2.51!. !. !. 2!. t!. ! !. .27!. 1.69!. *p<.05! ! **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! ! !!. 4,17. VIF. 10. 31% .01 ! ! ! !. 63!. !.
(73) 4,17. !. !. ! Beta! !. 1!. R2 !. R2 !. F. !. VIF!. .35!. 4.01***! !. !. !. 1.70!. .13!. 1.47!. .31!. 16.95***!. 1.74!. !. ,.05!. ,.46!. 2.53!. !. .38!. 3.78***!. 2.25!. .32!. 3.62***! !. !. !. 1.77!. .19!. 1.74!. !. !. !. 2.51!. .19!. 2.03*!. .32!. .01!. 3.03!. 2.04!. !. ,.10!. ,.88!. 2.70!. !. .35!. 3.45**!. 2.31!. !. !. 2!. t!. ! !. .31!. *p<.05! ! **p<.01! ! ***p<.001! !!!!. 4,1 !. ! 4,1!. ! !. !!!! !. 64!.
(74) !!!!. !. !. !. ! !. ! ! !!!! ! ! !!!!! ! ! !. 65!.
(75) ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!!. ! !!!!. Chall! Chall. 1996. Samuels 1994 2006. 1996. Samuels 1994 2006. White 1995. ! !!!! 9%. 9% !. 66!.
(76) 26%. Bowers. Swanson 1991. Cutting. Carlisle. Denckla 2005. ! !!!!. 2008. ! !!!!. 2008. 1999. 2011 2003. 2013 2011. ! !!!!. !. Klauda, S. L., & Guthrie, J. T. (2008). 67!.
(77) Van!den!Broek,!Espin,! Deno 2003 !. 42%. ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !. 68!.
(78) !. !. !!!! ! ! !. ! !. 4% 12%. 23%. 16%. 6%. 2% 26%. 9%. !. !. ! !. ! ! !. 69!.
(79) ! ! ! !!!!. ! ! ! !!!!. !. ! ! ! ! !. !. !. !. 70!.
(80) ! ! !!. ! !. !!!!. ! ! !!!! 9% ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !. 71!.
(81) ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !. 72!.
(82) !. !. 73!.
(83) !. 74!.
(84) !. 75!.
(85) !. 76!.
(86) !. 77!.
(87) !. 78!.
(88) !. 79!.
(89) !. 80!.
(90) !. 81!.
(91) !. 82!.
(92) !. !. ! ! ! !. !. 83!. !.
(93) !. !. !!!!. 23! 47! 71! 94! 119! 143! 168! 192! 217! 240! 265! 283! ! ! !. =__________. =__________. =__________ ! !. 84!. ! !.
(94) !. !. 25! ! ! 50! ! 75! ! 100! ! 125! ! 150! ! 175! ! 200! ! 225! ! 250! ! 275! ! 283!. =________ !. =________ 85!. =________.
(95)
(96)
(97)
相關文件
The second question in this paper is raised from the first question – the relationship between constructing Fo Guang Pure Land and the perspective of management beginning
The present study explores the relationship between organizational reward system, job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and organizational performance to
For the next nitrogen delivery system, In this study, the high-tech industry, nitrogen supply, for example, to explore in depth the relationship between
We try to find these factors affecting the rate of counting learning form the point of extension education students to analyze the relationship between learning motivation,
Experimental results show that, according to reading comprehension scores from Reading Comprehension Test and attitudes scores from the Elementary Reading Attitude Survey,
This study is aimed to investigate the current status and correlative between job characteristics and job satisfaction for employees in the Irrigation Associations, by
Finally, adding the discussion of cultural causes and the rise of Rome typeface, the relationship between the gothic script and the renaissance typeface design for the future study
The empirical results indicate that there are four results of causality relationship between Investor Sentiment and Stock Returns, such as (1) Investor
