{rfName}
Re

Indexed in

License and use

Altmetrics

Impact on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Share

Publications
>
Article

Reading to write an argumentation: The role of epistemological, reading and writing beliefs

Publicated to:JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN READING. 34 (3): 281-297 - 2011-08-01 34(3), DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01437.x

Authors: Martin, Ana; Echeita, Gerardo; Luna, Maria

Affiliations

Autonomous Univ Madrid, Dept Dev & Educ Psychol, Madrid, Spain - Author
Autonomous Univ Madrid, Educ & Teacher Training Fac, Madrid, Spain - Author
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid - Author

Abstract

The general aim of this study was to examine the relations among epistemological, reading and writing beliefs held by psychology undergraduates and the role played by these three types of belief in influencing the degree of perspectivism manifested in a written argumentation task based on reading two texts presenting conflicting perspectives on the same topic. A total of 118 fourth-year psychology students took part. Only 76 students performed the written argumentation task. The three types of belief were assessed using different questionnaires. The results show that the different types of belief do not occur in isolation, but have an internal coherence. They also indicate that only reading beliefs, together with the degree of perspectivism shown in a prior argumentation task, help to predict the degree of perspectivism in the written task following the reading of the texts. Copyright © 2011 UKLA.

Keywords

Quality education

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN READING due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency WoS (JCR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2011, it was in position 38/206, thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Education & Educational Research.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from the Field Citation Ratio (FCR) of the Dimensions source, it yields a value of: 6.09, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: Dimensions Jul 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-07-01, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 42
  • Scopus: 47

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-07-01:

  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 65 (PlumX).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

Continuing with the social impact of the work, it is important to emphasize that, due to its content, it can be assigned to the area of interest of ODS 4 - Quality Education, with a probability of 89% according to the mBERT algorithm developed by Aurora University.

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

There is a significant leadership presence as some of the institution’s authors appear as the first or last signer, detailed as follows: First Author (MATEOS GARCIA, MARIA ANGELES) and Last Author (Luna M).