The present study administered six test instruments to 13- to 14-year-old learners of English in Austria and Sweden (N = 213), countries offering settings with more explicit and implicit learning environments, respectively. Confirmatory Factor Analyses for Austria yielded a factor comprising timed grammaticality judgment tests, an oral narrative test, and elicited imitation, labelled in this study Automatized and/or Implicit Knowledge, and a factor including an untimed grammaticality judgment test and a metalinguistic knowledge test, named in this study Explicit Knowledge. In the Swedish context, goodness-of-fit indices provided some evidence that a single-factor model shows a better fit, although a comparison of this model with two-factor models did not reach statistical significance. The findings point to the potential importance of considering the specificities of a learning environment in interpreting learner achievement on measures of the implicit versus explicit knowledge spectrum.

中文翻译：

---

衡量青少年学习者的自动化、显性和/或隐性知识：背景问题？

本研究对奥地利和瑞典 ( N = 213) 13 至 14 岁的英语学习者使用了六种测试工具，这两个国家分别提供了更显性和隐性的学习环境。奥地利的验证性因素分析产生了一个由定时语法判断测试、口头叙述测试和引发模仿组成的因素，在本研究中标记为自动化和/或隐性知识，以及一个包括不定时语法判断测试和元语言知识测试的因素，命名为在这项研究中显性知识。在瑞典，拟合优度指数提供了一些证据，表明单因素模型显示出更好的拟合效果，尽管该模型与双因素模型的比较并未达到统计显着性。研究结果指出，在解释学习者隐性知识谱与显性知识谱测量的成就时，考虑学习环境的特殊性具有潜在的重要性。