Prediction of Reading Comprehension: Relative Contributions of Word Recognition, Language Proficiency, and Other Cognitive Skills Can Depend on How Comprehension Is Measured

Autor/inn/en	Cutting, Laurie E.; Scarborough, Hollis S.
Titel	Prediction of Reading Comprehension: Relative Contributions of Word Recognition, Language Proficiency, and Other Cognitive Skills Can Depend on How Comprehension Is Measured
Quelle	In: Scientific Studies of Reading, 10 (2006) 3, S.277-299 (23 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1088-8438
DOI	10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_5
Schlagwörter	Reading Comprehension; Word Recognition; Language Proficiency; Thinking Skills; Reading Tests; Hypothesis Testing; Cognitive Processes; Reading Rate; Language Skills; Predictor Variables; Comparative Analysis; Intelligence Differences; Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests; Gray Oral Reading Test; Wechsler Individual Achievement Test + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Leseverstehen; Worterkennung; Language skill; Language skills; Sprachkompetenz; Denkfähigkeit; Lesetest; Hypothesenprüfung; Hypothesentest; Cognitive process; Kognitiver Prozess; Reading readiness; Reading speed; Lesegeschwindigkeit; Prädiktor; WIAT; Eignungsprüfung; Eignungstest
Abstract	Reading comprehension scores from the Wechsler Individual Achievement Tests, the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, and the Gray Oral Reading Test were examined in relation to measures of reading, language, and other cognitive skills that have been hypothesized to contribute to comprehension and account for comprehension differences. In a sample of 97 first through tenth graders, the relative contributions of word recognition/decoding and oral language skills to comprehension varied from test to test. The inclusion of reading speed accounted for additional variance, but prediction of comprehension scores was minimally improved by including measures of rapid serial naming, verbal memory, IQ, or attention. The findings suggest that commonly used tests of reading comprehension, such as the three we compared, may not tap the same array of cognitive processes. Implications for research and practice are discussed. (Author).
Anmerkungen	Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 10 Industrial Avenue, Mahwah, NJ 07430. Tel: 800-926-6579; Tel: 201-258-2200; Fax: 201-236-0072; e-mail: journals@erlbaum.com; Web site: https://www.erlbaum.com.
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10