# Usefulness of Digital Language Resources in Improving Native Language among Adults
## 4 Results and Findings
### RQ2: Effects on Perceived Usefulness of Digital Language Resources  
When inspecting the effects on the perceived usefulness of digital language resources, we examined the effects of (a) age, (b) level of education, (c) the self-assessment of proficiency in language use, (d) the number of years that had passed from institutional language training, and (d) the mode of post-institutional language training. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Intention of Using Digital Language Resources 1**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Self-Initiative Uses of Analogue Language Resources**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & & **No** & & **Yes** & \multirow{2}{*}{\(x^{2}\) (3)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} \\ \cline{3-3} \cline{5-7}  & & \(n\) & \% & \(n\) & \% & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Seeking information} & Never & 11 & 13.1 & 2 & 2.38 & \multirow{4}{*}{11.73} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.008 \({}^{*}\)} \\ \cline{2-7}  & Rarely & 7 & 8.33 & 13 & 15.48 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Occasionally & 9 & 10.71 & 17 & 20.24 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Regularly & 8 & 9.52 & 17 & 20.24 & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Improving general language use} & Never & 15 & 17.86 & 4 & 4.76 & \multirow{4}{*}{14.94} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.002 \({}^{*}\)} \\ \cline{2-7}  & Rarely & 10 & 11.9 & 21 & 25 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Occasionally & 8 & 9.52 & 15 & 17.86 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Regularly & 2 & 2.38 & 9 & 10.71 & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Improving professional language use} & Never & 18 & 21.43 & 9 & 10.71 & \multirow{4}{*}{11.64} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.009 \({}^{*}\)} \\ \cline{2-7}  & Rarely & 9 & 10.71 & 20 & 23.81 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Occasionally & 4 & 4.76 & 15 & 17.86 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Occasionally & 4 & 4.76 & 15 & 17.86 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Regularly & 4 & 4.76 & 5 & 5.95 & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Using for learning study, or work} & Never & 11 & 13.1 & 1 & 1.19 & \multirow{4}{*}{16.23} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.001 \({}^{*}\)} \\ \cline{2-7}  & Rarely & 8 & 9.52 & 11 & 13.1 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Occasionally & 4 & 4.76 & 15 & 17.86 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Regularly & 12 & 14.29 & 22 & 26.19 & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Entertainment} & Never & 23 & 27.38 & 21 & 25 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Rarely & 7 & 8.33 & 18 & 21.43 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Occasionally & 3 & 3.57 & 4 & 4.76 & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Regularly & 2 & 2.38 & 6 & 7.14 & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* \(<\)0.05. \({}^{1}\) Rarely stands for “less than once a month”, occasionally for “one to three times a month” and regularly for “at least once a week”.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Chi-square comparison table of participants’ self-initiative use and non-use of analogue language resources with various types of intention. First, the effect of age on perceived usefulness of digital language resources was analysed with the Kruskal-Wallis H test. Participants were classified into three age groups: (1) Aged between 19 and 21, (2) aged between 22 and 25, and (3) aged 26 or older. No significant effect was found, \(p>0.05\). To inspect the effect of the level of education, three groups were created, where education Group 1 included participants with elementary, vocational, and secondary school education, Group 2 consisted of participants with the first Bologna study level or older equivalent, and Group 3 included participants with the second Bologna study level, older equivalent or higher level. The results of the Kruskal-Wallis H test revealed no statistically significant difference in the perceived usefulness of digital language resources, \(p>0.05\). Regarding the effect of the self-assessment of proficiency in language use, the Kruskal-Wallis H test showed no significant difference in perceived usefulness of digital language resources, \(p>0.05\). Likewise, we found no significant difference in the perceived usefulness of digital language resources when it came to the number of years that had passed since the institutional language training, \(p>0.05\). Moreover, we also examined if there was an effect in the number of years that had passed since institutional language training.