IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v109y2016i3d10.1007_s11192-016-2123-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Erratum to: Is time up for the Flesch measure of reading ease?

Author

Listed:
  • James Hartley

    (Keele University)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • James Hartley, 2016. "Erratum to: Is time up for the Flesch measure of reading ease?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2329-2329, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:109:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2123-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-2123-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-016-2123-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-016-2123-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ju Wen & Lei Lei, 2022. "Adjectives and adverbs in life sciences across 50 years: implications for emotions and readability in academic texts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4731-4749, August.
    2. Xi Zhao & Li Li & Wei Xiao, 2023. "The diachronic change of research article abstract difficulty across disciplines: a cognitive information-theoretic approach," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. James Hartley & Guillaume Cabanac, 2016. "Are two authors better than one? Can writing in pairs affect the readability of academic blogs?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2119-2122, December.
    4. Bella Reichard & Mark S Reed & Jenn Chubb & Ged Hall & Lucy Jowett & Alisha Peart & Andrea Whittle, 2020. "Writing impact case studies: a comparative study of high-scoring and low-scoring case studies from REF2014," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Anton Oleinik & Svetlana Kirdina-Chandler & Irina Popova & Tatyana Shatalova, 2017. "On academic reading: citation patterns and beyond," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 417-435, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:109:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2123-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.