In this content analysis, a research team examined the articles in 15 journals published over a span of 10 years to obtain an overview of the current field of literacy. Researchers coded the topics, theoretical perspectives, designs, and data sources in a total of 4,305 literacy-related articles. Analyses revealed statistically significant differences in the topics, perspectives, designs, and data sources among literacy articles in journals written for practitioners, those written for researchers, and those written for both practitioners and researchers. Although the topics in journals written for practitioners somewhat reflected the content of those written for researchers, results demonstrated a need to diversify methods used in articles published in journals written for researchers. We argue that this diversity is likely to enhance the ability of research to build the knowledge base in our field.

中文翻译：

---

2007-2016 年 15 种期刊的读写内容分析

在此内容分析中，一个研究团队检查了 10 年间发表的 15 种期刊中的文章，以了解当前扫盲领域的概况。研究人员在总共 4,305 篇与扫盲相关的文章中对主题、理论观点、设计和数据来源进行了编码。分析显示，在为从业者、为研究人员撰写的期刊以及为从业者和研究人员撰写的期刊中，读写文章在主题、观点、设计和数据来源方面存在统计学上的显着差异。尽管为从业者撰写的期刊中的主题在某种程度上反映了为研究人员撰写的主题的内容，但结果表明需要使在为研究人员撰写的期刊上发表的文章中使用的方法多样化。