Early literacy skills serve as the best precursors of reading success and risk indicators of the double deficit and triple deficit hypotheses according to the spelling consistency of languages. Our study analyzes the predictive value of phonological awareness, naming speed, and orthographic skills for early reading in Spanish. Participants included 362 Spanish children aged 4 to 5 years. We used data analysis to examine the relationships between these precursors and fluency through a structural equation model and investigated the risk indicators of poor reading performance according to the double deficit and triple deficit hypotheses using binary logistic analysis. Our research delimits a model for the Spanish language that emphasizes the predictive value of phonological awareness, letter-naming fluency, and knowledge of graphemes in early reading. Letter-naming fluency is the best precursor to early reading experiences, and poor early reading performance in children is explained by deficits in phonological awareness, naming speed, and visual orientation. Our findings confirm the risk indicators of the triple deficit hypothesis in the early learning of reading in Spanish.
AlegríaJ. (2006). Por un enfoque psicolingüístico del aprendizaje de la lectura y sus dificultades - 20 años después [For a psycholinguistic approach to reading learning and its difficulties—20 years later]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 29(1), 93–111. https://doi.org/10.1174/021037006775380957
2.
Arango-TobónaO. E.PinillaG. D.LoaizaT.PuertaI. C.Olivera-La RosacA.ArdiladA.MatuteeE.RossellifM. (2018). Relación entre lenguaje expresivo y receptivo y habilidades prelectoras [Relationship between expressive and receptive language and pre-reading skills]. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 50(3), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.14349/rlp.2018.v50.n3.1
3.
AraùjoS.PachecoA.FaíscaL.PeterssonK. M.ReisA. (2010). Visual rapid naming and phonological abilities: Different subtypes in dyslexic children. International Journal of Psychology, 45(6), 443–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.499949
4.
AsadiI. A.ShanyM. (2018). Examining the double-deficit hypothesis in vowelized–transparent Arabic in a national representative sample of grades 3 and 4. Dyslexia, 24(3), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1594
BoyleA.AugustD.TabakuL.ColeS.Simpson-BairdA. (2015). Dual Language Education Programs: Current State Policies and Practices. Office of English Language Acquisition, US Department of Education.
8.
BoweyJ. A. (2005). Predicting individual differences in learning to read. In SnowlingM. J.HulmeC. (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 155–172). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
9.
CaravolasM.LervågA.DefiorS.Seidlová MálkováG.HulmeC. (2013). Different patterns, but equivalent predictors, of growth in reading in consistent and inconsistent orthographies. Psychological Science, 24(8), 1398–1407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612473122
10.
CaravolasM.LervågA.MousikouP.EfrimC.LitavskýM.Onochie-QuintanillaE.SalasN.ShöffelováM.DefiorS.MikulajováM.Seidlová-MálkováG.HulmeC. (2012). Common patterns of prediction of literacy development in different alphabetic orthographies. Psychological Science, 23(6), 678–686. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611434536
11.
CattsH.FeyM.ZhangX.TomblinJ. B. (2001). Estimating the risk of future reading difficulties in kindergarten children: A research-based model and its clinical implementation. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2001/004)
12.
ChoJ. R.JiY. K. (2011). Cognitive profiles of Korean poor readers. Dyslexia, 17(4), 312–326. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.439
13.
ClaytonF. J.WestG.SearsC.HulmeC.LervågA. (2019). A longitudinal study of early reading development: Letter-sound knowledge, phoneme awareness and RAN, but not letter-sound integration, predict variations in reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 24(2), 91–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2019.1622546
CuetosF.RodríguezB.RuanoE.ArribasD. (2007). PROLEC-R. Batería de evaluación de los procesos lectores. Revisada [Battery evaluation of reading processes. Revised]. TEA Ediciones.
17.
DaviesR.CuetosF.Glez-SeijasR. M. (2007). Reading development and dyslexia in a transparent orthography: A survey of Spanish children. Annals of Dyslexia, 57(2), 179–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-007-0010-1
18.
DefiorS.SerranoF. (2014). Aspectos diacrónicos y sincrónicos del español: relación con la adquisición del lenguaje escrito [Diachronic and synchronic aspects of Spanish: the relationship with literacy acquisition]. Estudios de Psicología, 35(3), 450–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/02109395.2014.974422
19.
De JongP.Van der LeijA. (1999). Specific contributions of phonological abilities to early reading acquisition: Results from a Dutch latent variable longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 450–476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.450
20.
De la CalleA.M.Guzmán-SimónF.García-JiménezE. (2018). Letter Knowledge and Learning Sequence of Graphemes in Spanish: Precursors of Early Reading. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 23(2), 128–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2017.10.002
21.
DunnL. M.DunnL. M.ArribasD. (2006). Test de Vocabulario en Imágenes [Vocabulary test in images]. TEA Ediciones.
22.
FrickeS.SzczerbinskiM.Fox-BoyerA.StackhouseJ. (2016). Preschool predictors of early literacy acquisition in German-speaking children. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(1), 29–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.116
23.
FrijtersJ. C.LovettM. W.SteinbachK. A.WolfM.SevcikR. A.MorrisR. D. (2011). Neurocognitive predictors of reading outcomes for children with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(2), 150–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219410391185
24.
FurnesB.ElwérÅ.SamuelssonS.OlsonR. K.ByrneB. (2019). Investigating the double-deficit hypothesis in more and less transparent orthographies: A longitudinal study from preschool to grade 2. Scientific Studies of Reading, 23(6), 478–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2019.1610410
25.
GeorgiouG. K.PapadopoulosT. C.KaizerE. L. (2014). Different RAN components relate to reading at different points in time. Reading and Writing, 27(8), 1379–1394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-014-9496-1
26.
GeorgiouG. K.ParrilaR.PapadopoulosT. C. (2008). Predictors of word decoding and reading fluency across languages varying in orthographic consistency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 566–580. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.566
27.
GeorgiouG. K.ParrilaR.PapadopoulosT. C. (2016). The anatomy of the RAN-reading relationship. Reading and Writing, 29(9), 1793–1815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9653-9
28.
GharaibehM.SartawiA. A.DodeenH.AlzyoudiM. (2019). Effects of rapid automatized naming and phonological awareness deficits on the reading ability of Arabic-speaking elementary students. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2019.1585247
29.
Gutiérrez-FresnedaR.DíezA.Jiménez-PérezE. (2017). Estudio longitudinal sobre el aprendizaje lector en las primeras edades [Longitudinal study on learning reader in the early ages]. Revista de Educación, 378, 30–51. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2017-378-360
30.
HeikkiläR.TorppaM.AroM.NärhiV.AhonenT. (2016). Double-deficit hypothesis in a clinical sample. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(5), 546–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219415572895
31.
HoganT. P.CattsH. W.LittleT. D. (2005). The relationship between phonological awareness and reading. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(4), 285–293. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2005/029)
32.
KirbyJ. R.DesrochersA.RothL.LaiS. S. (2008). Longitudinal predictors of word reading development. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49(2), 103–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/0708-5591.49.2.103
33.
KirbyJ. R.GeorgiouG. K.MartinussenR.ParrilaR. (2010). Naming speed and reading: From prediction to instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(3), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.45.3.4
34.
LanderlK.FreudenthalerH. H.HeeneM.De JongP. F.DesrochersA.ManolitsisG.ParrilaR.GeorgiouG. K. (2018). Phonological awareness and rapid automatized naming as longitudinal predictors of reading in five alphabetic orthographies with varying degrees of consistency. Scientific Studies of Reading, 23(3), 220–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2018.1510936
35.
LanderlK.WimmerH. (2000). Deficits in phoneme segmentation are not the core problem of dyslexia: Evidence from German and English children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21(2), 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400002058
36.
LepolaJ.LynchJ.KiuruN.LaakkonenE.NiemiP. (2016). Early oral language comprehension, task orientation, and foundational reading skills as predictors of grade 3 reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(4), 373–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.145
37.
LoniganC. J.BurgessS. R.AnthonyJ. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36(5), 596–613. https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.36.5.596
38.
López-EscribanoC.KatzirT. (2008). Are phonological processes separate from the processes underlying naming speed in a shallow orthography?Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 6(16), 641–666. https://doi.org/10.25115/ejrep.v6i16.1302
39.
ManisF.DoiL.BhadhaB. (2000). Naming speed, phonological awareness, and orthographic knowledge in second graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(4), 325–333, 374. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300405
40.
MassonniéJ.BiancoM.LimaL.BressouxP. (2019). Longitudinal predictors of reading comprehension in French at first grade: Unpacking the oral comprehension component of the simple view. Learning and Instruction, 60, 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.01.005
41.
MollK.RamusF.BartlingJ.BruderJ.KunzeS.NeuhoffN.StreiftauS.LyytinenH.LeppänenP. H. T.LohvansuuK.TóthD.HonbolygóF.CsépeV.BogliottiC.IannuzziS.DémonetJ. F.LongerasE.ValdoisS.GeorgeF.. . .LanderlK. (2014). Cognitive mechanisms underlying reading and spelling development in five European orthographies. Learning and Instruction, 29, 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.09.003
42.
Onochie-QuintanillaE.DefiorS.SimpsonI. C. (2017). Visual multi-element processing as a pre-reading predictor of decoding skill. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.11.003
43.
Ozernov-PalchikO.NortonE. S.SideridisG.BeachS. D.WolfM.GabrieliJ. D. E.GaabN. (2016). Longitudinal stability of pre-reading skill profiles of kindergarten children: Implications for early screening and theories of reading. Developmental Science, 20(5), Article e12471. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12471
44.
PapadopoulosT. C.GeorgiouG. K.KendeouP. (2009). Investigating the double-deficit hypothesis in Greek. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(6), 528–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409338745
45.
PapadopoulosT. C.SpanoudisG. C.GeorgiouG. K. (2016). How is RAN related to reading fluency? A comprehensive examination of the prominent theoretical accounts. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1217. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01217
46.
PoulsenM.JuulH.ElbroC. (2015). Multiple mediation analysis of the relationship between rapid naming and reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 38(2), 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01547.x
47.
PuolakanahoA.AhonenT.AroM.EklundK.LeppänenP.PoikkeusA. (2007). Very early phonological and language skills: Estimating individual risk of reading disability. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48(9), 923–931. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01763.x
48.
PuolakanahoA.AhonenT.AroM.EklundK.LeppänenP. H. T.PoikkeuaA. M.TolvanenA.TorppaM.LyytinenH. (2008). Developmental links of very early phonological and language skills to second grade reading outcomes. Strong to accuracy but only minor to fluency. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(4), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219407311747
49.
Real Academia Española & Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española. (2010). Ortografía de la lengua española [Spelling of the Spanish language]. Espasa.
50.
SchaarsM. M.SegersE.VerhoevenL. (2017). Word decoding development during phonics instruction in children at risk for dyslexia. Dyslexia, 23(2), 141–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1556
51.
SchatschneiderC.CarlsonC. D.FrancisD. J.FoormanB. R.FletcherJ. M. (2002). Relationship of rapid automatized naming and phonological awareness in early reading development: Implications for the double-deficit hypothesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(3), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940203500306
52.
SchatschneiderC.FletcherJ.FrancisD. J.CarlsonC.FoormanB. (2004). Kindergarten prediction of reading skills: A longitudinal comparative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 265–282. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.265
53.
SellésP.MartínezT.Vidal-AbarcaE.GilabertR. (2008). Batería de Inicio a la Lectura [Start-up battery reading]. Instituto Calasanz de Ciencias de la Educación.
54.
ShterevaK. (2014). The double-deficit hypothesis and prediction of dyslexia. Journal of Speech and Language Pathology, 3(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.92.4.668
55.
SnelM. J.AarnoutseC. A. J.TerwelJ.van LeeuweJ. F. J.van der VeldW. M. (2016). Prediction of word recognition in the first half of grade 1. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(2), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2016.1143260
56.
SongS.GeorgiouG.SuM.-M.ShuH. (2016). How well do phonological awareness and rapid automatized naming correlate with reading accuracy and fluency in Chinese? A meta-analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 20(2), 99–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2015.1088543
57.
SteacyL. M.KirbyJ. R.ParrilaR.ComptonD. L. (2014). Classification of double deficit groups across time: An analysis of group stability from kindergarten to second grade. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(4), 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1556
58.
Suárez-CoallaP.García-de-CastroM.CuetosF. (2013). Variables predictoras de la lectura y la escritura en castellano [Predictor variables of the reading and writing in Spanish]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 36(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1174/021037013804826537
59.
TorppaM.GeorgiouG.SalmiP.EklundK.LyytinenH. (2012). Examining the double-deficit hypothesis in an orthographically consistent language. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(4), 287–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2011.554470
60.
TorppaM.ParrilaR.NiemiP.LerkkanenM.PoikkeusA.NurmiJ. (2013). The double deficit hypothesis in the transparent Finnish orthography: A longitudinal study from kindergarten to grade 2. Reading and Writing, 26(8), 1353–1380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9423-2
61.
von GoldammerA.MählerC.BockmannA. K.HasselhornM. (2010). Vorhersage früher Schriftsprachleistungen aus vorschulischen Kompetenzen der Sprache und der phonologischen Informationsverarbeitung [Prediction of reading and spelling from preschool competencies in language and phono-logical information processing]. Zeitschriftfür Entwicklung-spsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 42(1), 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000005
WangY.YinL.McBrideC. (2015). Unique predictors of early reading and writing: A one-year longitudinal study of Chinese kindergarteners. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 32, 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.02.004
64.
WeiserB.MathesP. (2011). Using encoding instruction to improve the reading and spelling performances of elementary students at risk for literacy difficulties: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 170–200. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310396719
65.
WijaythilakeM. A.ParrilaR.InoueT.NagS. (2018). Instruction matters to the development of phoneme awareness and its relationship to Akshara knowledge and word reading: Evidence from Sinhala. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22(5), 420–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2018.1466890
66.
WolfM.BowersP. G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 9(3), 415–438. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415
67.
WolfM.DencklaM. (2003). Rapid automatized naming tests. Super Duper.
68.
WolfM.O’RourkeA. G.GidneyC.LovettM.CirinoP.MorrisR. (2002). The second deficit: An investigation of the independence of phonological and naming-speed deficits in developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing, 15(1), 43–72. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013816320290
69.
YangX.PengP.MengX. (2019). Contributions of basic cognitive processing to Chinese reading: The mediation effect of basic language processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 2670. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02670
70.
ZieglerJ.BertrandD.TóthD.CsépeV.ReisA.FaíscaL.SaineN.LyytinenH.VaessenA.BlomertL. (2010). Orthographic depth and its impact on universal predictors of reading a cross-language investigation. Psychological Science, 21(4), 551–559. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610363406
