Abstract
The current research aimed to discover the most frequently used reading strategies of EFL university students across their reading proficiency and personality types and examine the interaction between the predictive factors in using the strategies when reading English online texts. Data were collected using a questionnaire on reading strategies distributed to 141 students majoring in English Language Education at one of the universities in Indonesia to achieve the aims. The students’ responses to the questionnaire were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics to evaluate the relationship among those variables. Then, the participants were classified into four groups based on their reading proficiency and personality types. The results indicate that each group of students used various reading strategies. Moreover, an interaction between reading proficiency and personality types on reading strategy use can be seen only in global and socio-affective strategies. The relationship among those variables was also accomplished using a multiple regression model. Based on the results, it can be claimed that students with different reading proficiency and personality types use different strategies for comprehending English online texts. The findings recommend that students need to be exposed to use support strategies, such as paraphrasing or taking notes. Therefore, they can promote their online reading performance by capturing and interpreting the information they obtain from texts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and materials
The data are available upon request from the authors.
Code Availability
Not applicable.
References
Ackerman, R., & Lauterman, T. (2012). Taking reading comprehension exams on screen or on paper? A metacognitive analysis of learning texts under time pressure. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1816–1828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.04.023
Agler, L. M. L., Noguchi, K., & Alfsen, L. K. (2019). Personality traits as predictors of reading comprehension and metacomprehension accuracy. Current Psychology, 38(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00439-y
Ahmadian, M., & Pasand, P. G. (2017). EFL learners’ use of online metacognitive reading strategies and its relation to their self-efficacy in reading. The Reading Matrix, 17(2), 117–132. http://www.readingmatrix.com/files/17-097to04m.pdf
Alghail, A. A. A., & Mahfoodh, O. H. A. (2016). Academic reading difficulties encountered by international graduate students in a Malaysian university. Issues in Educational Research, 6(3), 369–383. http://www.iier.org.au/iier26/alghail.pdf
Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05384.x
Artelt, C., & Schneider, W. (2015). Cross-country generalizability of the role of metacognitive knowledge in students’ strategy use and reading competence. Teachers College Record, 117(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811511700109
Ashton, K. (2019). Reading approach and strategy use across languages in an assessment context: Does one-size fit all? The Language Learning Journal, 47(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1172333
Anggraini, M. P., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2020). Scrutinizing EFL learners’ online reading strategy use across proficiency levels. XLinguae, 13(4), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2020.13.04.14
Azmuddin, R. A., Nor, N. F. M., & Hamat, A. (2017). Metacognitive online reading and navigational strategies by science and technology university students. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 17(3), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2017-1703-02
Azmuddin, R. A., Nor, N. F. M., & Hamat, A. (2018). Using iREAD in understanding online reading strategies applied by science and technology students. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 13(3), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJWLTT.2018070102
Bagheri, M. S., & Faghih, M. (2012). The relationship between self-esteem, personality type and reading comprehension of Iranian EFL students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(8), 1641–1650. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.8.1641-1650
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Strauss, J. P. (1993). Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effect of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5), 715–722. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.715
Barrot, J. S. (2016). ESL learners’ use of reading strategies across different text types. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(5–6), 883–892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-016-0313-2
Beşkardeşler, S., & Kocaman, O. (2016). Metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use by English language teaching students in Turkish context: Sakarya university sample. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 6(2), 254–69. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.61107
Boakye, N. (2016). The efficacy of socio-affective teaching strategies in a reading intervention: Students’ views and opinions. Language Matters, 47(3), 393–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/10228195.2016.1226379
Buratti, S., Allwood, C. M., & Kleitman, S. (2013). First- and second-order metacognitive judgments of semantic memory reports: The influence of personality traits and cognitive styles. Metacognition and Learning, 8, 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-013-9096-5
Caverly, D. C., Payne, E. M., Castillo, A. M., Sarker, A., Threadgill, E., & West, D. (2019). Identifying digital literacies to build academic literacies. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 49(3), 170–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2019.1638218
Chou, M. H. (2021). The mediating role of achievement emotions in the relationship between instructional clarity, English proficiency, and reading strategies. Educational Psychology, 41(5), 582–601. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2021.1882660
Coiro, J. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension on the internet: Contributions of offline reading skills, online reading skills, and prior knowledge. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4), 352–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X11421979
Dahl, M., Allwood, C. M., Rennemark, M., & Hagberg, B. (2010). The relation between personality and the realism in confidence judgments in older adults. European Journal of Ageing, 7(4), 283–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-010-0164-2
de Bruin, A. B. H., Kok, E. M., Lobbestael, J., & de Grip, A. (2017). The impact of an online tool for monitoring and regulating learning at university: Overconfidence, learning strategy, and personality. Metacognition and Learning, 12(1), 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9159-5
Denton, C. A., Wolters, C. A., York, M. J., Swanson, E., Kulesz, P. A., & Francis, D. J. (2015). Adolescents’ use of reading comprehension strategies: Differences related to reading proficiency, grade level, and gender. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.016
Encheva, M., Zlatkova, P., Keskin, N., & Vatansever, Ä. (2017). Mobile and information literacy perceptions and skills of library and information sciences and humanities students from Bulgaria and Turkey. International Information & Library Review, 49(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2017.1314145
Gee, J. P. (2000). The New Literacy Studies: From socially situated to the work of the social. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton, & R. Ivannic (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 180–196). London: Routledge
Giannetti, F. (2017). Against the grain: Reading for the challenges of collaborative digital humanities pedagogy. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 24(2–4), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2017.1340217
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26
Gough, H. G. (1987). California psychological inventory administrator’s guide. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press
Huang, H., Chern, C., & Lin, C. (2009). EFL learners’ use of online reading strategies and comprehension of texts: An exploratory study. Computers & Education, 52(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.003
Jafarigohar, M., & Behrooznia, S. (2012). The effect of anxiety on reading comprehension among distance EFL learners. International Education Studies, 5(2), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v5n2p159
Kasemsap, B., & Lee, H. Y. H. (2015). L2 Reading in Thailand: Vocational College Students’ Application of Reading Strategies to their Reading of English Texts. The Reading Matrix, 15(2), 101–117. http://www.readingmatrix.com/files/13-p0gvv09k.pdf
Kervin, L., & Mantei, J. (2016). Assessing emergent readers’ knowledge about online reading. The Reading Teacher, 69(6), 647–651. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1458
Kiili, C., Leu, D. J., Utriainen, J., Coiro, J., Kanniainen, L., Tolvanen, A. … Leppänen, P. H. T. (2018). Reading to learn from online information: Modeling the factor structure. Journal of Literacy Research, 50(3), 304–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X18784640
Kokkinos, C. M., Kargiotidis, A., & Markos, A. (2015). The relationship between learning and study strategies and Big Five personality traits among junior university student teachers. Learning and Individual Differences, 43, 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.031
Lee, A. (2018). Physical and digital reading habits of adult Singaporeans. Journal of Library Administration, 58(6), 629–643. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2018.1491189
Lin, L. C., & Yu, W. Y. (2015). A think-aloud study of strategy use by EFL college readers reading Chinese and English texts. Journal of Research in Reading, 38(3), 286–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12012
Lindholm, A., & Tengberg, M. (2019). The Reading development of Swedish L2 middle school students and its relation to reading strategy use. Reading Psychology, 40(8), 782–813. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2019.1674432
Liyanage, I., & Bartlett, B. (2013). Personality types and languages learning strategies: Chameleons changing colours. System, 41(3), 598–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.011
Marshall, T. C., Lefringhausen, K., & Ferenczi, N. (2015). The big five, self-esteem, and narcissism as predictors of the topics people write about in Facebook status updates. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.039
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1985). Updating Norman’s “adequate taxonomy”: Intelligence and personality dimensions in natural language and in questionnaires. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(1), 710–721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.710
Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2–10.
Mohseni, F., Seifoori, Z., & Ahangari, S. (2020). The impact of metacognitive strategy training and critical thinking awareness-raising on reading comprehension. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1720946
Myrberg, C., & Wiberg, N. (2015). Screen vs. paper: What is the difference for reading and learning? Insights the UKSG Journal, 28(2), 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.236
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House Publishers
Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in context (Second edition). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Park, H. R., & Kim, D. (2017). English language learners’ strategies for reading online texts: Influential factors and patterns of use at home and in school. International Journal of Educational Research, 82, 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.01.002
Rekabdar, S., Behrouzi, P., & Hakhverdian, A. (2015). The effect of using metacognitive strategies on reading achievement of Iranian intermediate extroverted vs. introverted learners. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 2(1), 171–186. http://www.ijeionline.com/attachments/article/35/IJEIonline_Vol.2_No.1_2015-1-15.pdf
Rienties, B., Lewis, T., McFarlane, R., Nguyen, Q., & Toetenel, L. (2018). Analytics in online and offline language learning environments: The role of learning design to understand student online engagement. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(3), 273–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1401548
Rojas-Drummond, S., Maine, F., Alarcón, M., Trigo, A. L., Barrera, M. J., Mazón, N. … Hofmann, R. (2017). Dialogic literacy: Talking, reading and writing among primary school children. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 12, 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2016.09.005
Safdarian, Z., Ghyasi, M., & Farsani, M. A. (2014). How reading strategy use and personality types are related? The Reading Matrix, 14(1), 121–135. http://www.readingmatrix.com/files/1-2q36241i.pdf
Salmerón, L., & Delgado, P. (2019). Critical analysis of the effects of the digital technologies on reading and learning / Análisis crítico sobre los efectos de las tecnologías digitales en la lectura y el aprendizaje. Cultura y Educación, 31(3), 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2019.1630958
Schaefer, P. S., Williams, C. C., Goodie, A. S., & Campbell, W. K. (2004). Overconfidence and the Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality, 38(5), 473–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2003.09.010
Schweiker, M., Hawighorst, M., & Wagner, A. (2016). The influence of personality traits on occupant behavioural patterns. Energy and Buildings, 131, 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.09.019
Shang, H. F. (2018). EFL medical students’ metacognitive strategy use for hypertext reading comprehension. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(2), 259–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9156-y
Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, 431–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2
Taki, S. (2016). Metacognitive online reading strategy use: Readers’ perceptions in L1 and L2. Journal of Research in Reading, 39(4), 409–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12048
Talebi, S. H., Maghsoudi, M., & Khodamoradi, A. (2020). Perceived reading strategy awareness and use (RSAU) and reading ability across foreign language disciplines at the university level. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 50(3), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2020.1786480
Türkyılmaz, M. (2015). The relationship between reading attitude, metacognitive awareness of reading strategies, personality and self-regulation: A study of modeling. Education, 136(1), 11–18. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A428998428/AONE?u=anon~57a1e69f&sid=googleScholar&xid=cb2ef3d9
Vlieghe, J., Vandermeersche, G., & Soetaert, R. (2016). Social media in literacy education: Exploring social reading with pre-service teachers. New Media & Society, 18(5), 800–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814547683
Wang, Y. H. (2016). Reading strategy use and comprehension performance of more successful and less successful readers: A think-aloud study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16(5), 1789–1813. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.5.0116
Wu, J. Y., & Peng, Y. C. (2017). The modality effect on reading literacy: Perspectives from students’ online reading habits, cognitive and metacognitive strategies, and web navigation skills across regions. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(7), 859–876. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1224251
Yusuf, Y.Q., Fitrisia, D., & Tan, K. E. (2015). Investigating metacognitive awareness of reading strategies to strengthen students’ performance in reading comprehension. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 30, 15–30.
Zafar, S., & Meenakshi, K. (2012). A study on the relationship between extroversion-introversion and risk-taking in the context of second language acquisition. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 1(1), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2012.v1i1.42
Zeynali, S., Zeynali, S., & Motlagh, S. F. B. (2015). The effects of socio-affective strategy in the enhancement of reading comprehension among Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 4(2), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.s.2016040201.12
Acknowledgements
The authors of this study would like to express their gratitude to the Directorate of Research, Technology and Community Service (DRTPM) – The Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology (MoECRT), Republic Indonesia, for providing the financial support of the research with the research grant number: 18.3.11/UN32.14.1/LT/2021.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
We confirm that no financial interest or benefit has arisen from the direct application of this research.
Ethics approval
The study conformed to ethical norms. Documents can be supplied upon request.
Consent to participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Consent for publication
The participant has consented to the submission of the case report to the journal.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Anggraini, M.P., Cahyono, B.Y., Anugerahwati, M. et al. The interaction effects of reading proficiency and personality types on EFL university students’ online reading strategy use. Educ Inf Technol 27, 8821–8839 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10979-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10979-9