The purpose of this study was to test the role of visual processing speed and IQ in a model of reading. This study investigated whether the processes involved in reading differ between a group of children with and a group without reading disability. These two groups of children completed tests of reading comprehension, listening comprehension, decoding, processing speed, and intelligence. The results indicated that processing speed explains a significant amount of variance in reading comprehension over that accounted for by the simple view of reading. Also, IQ accounts for a significant amount of variance in reading over that accounted for by the simple view of reading and processing speed. Path analyses indicated that the effect of IQ on reading is partially mediated by decoding in the children with reading disability. The results point to the importance of the role of IQ in predicting reading comprehension.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aaron, P.G. (1991). Can reading disabilities be diagnosed without using intelligence tests?Journal of Learning Disabilities , 24, 178—186, 191.
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author .
3.
Assistance to States for Education of Handicapped Children: Procedures for Evaluating Specific Learning Disabilities. 42 Fed. Reg.65,082—65,085 (1997).
4.
Badian, N.A. (1999). Reading disability defined as a discrepancy between listening and reading comprehension: A longitudinal study of stability, gender differences, and prevalence. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 32, 138—148.
5.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator—mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173—1182.
6.
Chappe, P., Hasher, L., & Siegel, L.S. (2000). Working memory, inhibitory control, and reading disability. Memory and Cognition, 28, 8—17.
7.
DeFries, J.C., Plomin, R., Vandenberg, S.G., & Kuse, A.R. (1981). Parent—offspring resemblance in the Colorado Adoption Project: Biological, adoptive, and control parents and one-year-old children. Intelligence, 5, 243—277.
8.
Fawcett, A.J., Nicolson, R.I., & Maclagan, F. (2001). Cerebellar tests differentiate between groups of poor readers with and without IQ discrepancy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 119—135.
9.
Fletcher, J.M., Francis, D., Rourke, B., Shaywitz, S., & Shaywitz, B. (1992). The validity of discrepancy-based definitions of reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 25, 555—561.
10.
Gough, P.B., & Tunmer, W.E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6—10.
11.
Gough, P.B., & Wren, S. (1998). The decomposition of decoding. In C. Hulme & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and spelling: Development and disorders (pp. 19—32). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum .
12.
Hoover, W.A., & Gough, P.B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2, 127—160.
13.
Hoskyn, M., & Swanson, H.L. (2000). Cognitive processing of low achievers and children with reading disabilities: A selective meta-analytic review of the published literature. School Psychology Review, 29, 102—119.
14.
Jensen, A.R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.
15.
Joshi, R.M., & Aaron, P.G. (2000). The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex. Reading Psychology, 21, 85—97.
16.
Joshi, R.M., Williams, K.A., & Wood, J.R. (1998). Predicting reading comprehension from listening comprehension: Is this the answer to the IQ debate? In C. Hulme & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and spelling: Development and disorders (pp. 319—327). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17.
Kail, R., & Hall, L.K. (2001) Distinguishing short-term memory from working memory . Memory and Cognition, 29, 1—9.
18.
Kaufman, A.S. (1994). Intelligent testing with the WISC-III. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
19.
Kerns, K., & Decker, S.N. (1985). Multifactorial assessment of reading disability: Identifying the best predictors. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 60, 747—753.
20.
McBride-Chang, C., & Manis, F.R. (1996). Structural invariance in the associations of naming speed, phonological awareness, and verbal reasoning in good and poor readers: A test of the double deficit hypothesis. Reading and Writing , 8, 323— 339.
21.
Mercer, C.D., Jordan, L., Allsopp, D.H., & Mercer, A.R. (1996). Learning disabilities definitions and criteria used by state education departments. Learning Disability Quarterly , 19, 217—232.
22.
Meyer, M.S. (2000). The ability—achievement discrepancy: Does it contribute to an understanding of learning disabilities?Educational Psychology Review, 12, 315—337.
23.
Naglieri, J.A. (2001). Do ability and reading achievement correlate?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 304—305.
24.
Naglieri, J.A., & Ronning, M. (2000). The relationship between general ability using the NNAT and SAT reading achievement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 18, 230—239.
25.
Palladino, P., Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Pazzaglia, F. (2001). Working memory and updating processes in reading comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 29, 344—354.
26.
Pennington, B.F., Cardoso-Martins, C., Green, P.A., & Lefly, D.L. (2001). Comparing the phonological and double deficit hypotheses for developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing , 14, 707— 755.
27.
Prifitera, A., & Dersh, J. (1993). Base rates of WISC-III diagnostic subtest patterns among normal, learning-disabled, and ADHD samples. In B. Bracken & R. Mc-Callum (Eds.), Wechsler intelligence scale for children: Third edition (pp. 43—55). Cordova, TN: Psychoeducational Corp.
28.
Psychological Corp. (1992). Manual for the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test. San Antonio, TX: Author.
29.
Sattler, J.M. (2001). Assessment of children (4th ed.). San Diego: Author.
30.
Siegel, L.S. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 469—478.
31.
Siegel, L. (1992). An evaluation of the discrepancy definition of dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 618—629.
32.
Siegel, L.S. (1993). Phonological processing deficits as the basis of a reading disability. Developmental Review, 13, 246—257.
33.
Siegel, L.S. (1998). The discrepancy formula: Its use and abuse. In B. K. Shapiro, P. J. Accardo, & A. J. Capute (Eds.), Specific reading disability: A view of the spectrum (pp. 21—32). Timonium, MD: York Press.
34.
Snowling, M.J. (2001). From language to reading and dyslexia. Dyslexia, 7, 37—46.
35.
Spafford, C.S. (1989). Wechsler Digit Span subtest: Diagnostic usefulness with dyslexic children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 115—125.
36.
Spring, C., & French, L. (1990). Identifying children with specific reading disabilities from listening and reading discrepancy scores. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 53—58.
37.
Stanovich, K.E. (1991). Discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Has intelligence led us astray?Reading Research Quarterly , 26, 7—29.
38.
Stanovich, K.E., & Siegel, L.S. (1994). Phenotypic performance profile of children with reading disabilities: A regression-based test of the phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 24—53.
39.
Swanson, H.L. (1993). Working memory in learning disability subgroups . Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 87—114.
40.
Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Burgess, S., & Hecht, S. (1997). Contributions of phonological awareness and rapid automatic naming ability to the growth of word-reading skills in second-to fifth-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 161—185.
41.
Tunmer, W.E., & Hoover, W.A. (1992). Cognitive and linguistic factors in learning to read. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Trieman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 175— 214). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
42.
Vellutino, F.R. (2001). Further analysis of the relationship between reading achievement and intelligence: A response to Naglieri. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 306—310.
43.
Vernon, P. A. (Ed.). (1987). Speed of information processing and intelligence. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
44.
Wadsworth, S.J., Olson, R.K., Pennington, B.F., & DeFries, J.C. (2000). Differential genetic etiology of reading disability as a function of IQ. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 192—199.
45.
Wechsler, D. (1991). Manual for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children —Third Edition. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
46.
Wechsler, D. (1997). Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale —Third Edition. New York: Psychological Corp.
47.
Woodcock, R.W. (1987). Woodcock reading mastery test—Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
