The simple view of reading (SVR) proposes that performance in reading comprehension is the result of decoding and linguistic comprehension, and that each component is necessary but not sufficient for reading comprehension. In this study, the joint and unique predictive influences of decoding and linguistic comprehension for reading comprehension were examined with a group of 757 children in Grades 3 through 5. Children completed multiple measures of each construct, and latent variables were used in all analyses. Overall, the results of our study indicate that (a) the two constructs included in the SVR account for almost all of the variance in reading comprehension, (b) there are developmental trends in the relative importance of the two components, and (c) the two components share substantial predictive variance, which may complicate efforts to substantially improve children’s reading comprehension because the overlap may reflect stable individual differences in general cognitive or linguistic abilities.
AaronP. G.JoshiR. M.GoodenR.BentumK. E. (2008). Diagnosis and treatment of reading disabilities based on the component model of reading: An alternative to the discrepancy model of LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 67–84.
2.
AaronP. G.JoshiR. M.WilliamsK. A. (1999). Not all reading disabilities are alike. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 120–137.
3.
AhmedY.FrancisD. J.YorkM.FletcherJ. M.BarnesM.KuleszP. (2016). Validation of the Direct and Inferential Mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension in grades 7 through 12. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44–45, 68–82.
4.
ApelK.DiehmE.ApelL. (2013). Using multiple measures of morphological awareness to assess its relation to reading. Topics in Language Disorders, 33, 42–56.
5.
BrazeD.TaborW.ShankweilerD. P.MenclW. E. (2007). Speaking up for vocabulary: Reading skill differences in young adults. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 226–243.
CaravolasM.LervågA.DefiorS.Seidlová MálkováG.HulmeC. (2013). Different patterns, but equivalent predictors, of growth in reading in consistent and inconsistent orthographies. Psychological Science, 24, 1398–1407.
9.
Carrow-WoolfolkE. (1995). Oral and Written Language Scales. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
10.
Carrow-WoolfolkE. (2008). Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
11.
CarverR. P.DavidA. H. (2001). Investigating reading achievement using a causal model. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 107–140.
12.
ConnersF. A. (2009). Attentional control and the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 22, 591–613.
13.
ConnorC. M.LoniganC. J. (2010). Morphological syntax maze task. Tallahassee: Reading for Understanding Network, Florida State University.
14.
CuttingL. E.ScarboroughH. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 277–299.
15.
de JongP. F.van der LeijA. (2002). Effects of phonological abilities and linguistic comprehension on the development of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 51–77.
16.
FloritE.CainK. (2011). The simple view of reading: Is it valid for different types of alphabetic orthographies?Education Psychology Review, 23, 553–576.
17.
FoormanB. R.HerreraS.PetscherY.MitchellA.TruckenmillerA. (2015). The structure of oral language and reading and their relation to comprehension in kindergarten through grade 2. Reading and Writing, 28, 655–681.
18.
FoormanB. R.KoonS.PetscherY.MitchellA.TruckenmillerA. (2015). Examining general and specific factors in the dimensionality of oral language and reading in 4th–10th grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 884–899.
19.
GarciaJ. R.CainK. (2014). Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English. Review of Educational Research, 84, 74–111.
20.
GoodrichJ. M.LoniganC. J. (2015). Lexical characteristics of words and phonological awareness skills of preschool children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 1509–1531.
21.
GoughP. B.TunmerW. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10.
22.
GrahamJ. W.TaylorB. J.OlchowskiA. E.CumsilleP. E. (2006). Planned missing data designs in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 11, 323–343.
23.
GustafsonS.SamuelssonC.JohanssonE.WallmannJ. (2013). How simple is the simple view of reading?Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57, 292–308.
24.
HammillD. D.NewcomerP. L. (2008). Test of Language Development—Intermediate: Fourth edition. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
25.
HooverW. A.GoughP. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2, 127–160.
26.
HuaA. H.KeenanJ. M. (2017). Interpreting reading comprehension test results: Quantile regression shows that explanatory factors can vary with performance level. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21, 225–238.
27.
JohnstonT. C.KirbyJ. R. (2006). The contribution of naming speed to the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 19, 339–361.
28.
JoshiR. M.AaronP. G. (2000). The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex. Reading Psychology, 21, 85–97.
29.
JoshiR. M.JiX. R.BreznitzZ.AmielM.YuliaA. (2015). Validation of the simple view of reading in Hebrew—A Semitic language. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19, 243–252.
30.
KeenanJ. M.BetjemannR. S.OlsonR. K. (2008). Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12, 281–399.
31.
KershawS.SchatschneiderC. (2012). A latent variable approach to the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 25, 433–464.
32.
KimY.-S. (2017). Why the simple view of reading is not simplistic: Unpacking component skills of reading using a Direct and Indirect Effect Model of Reading (DIER). Scientific Studies of Reading, 21, 310–333.
33.
KimY.-S.ParkC. H.WagnerR. K. (2014). Is oral/text reading fluency a “bridge” to reading comprehension?Reading and Writing, 27, 79–99.
34.
KirbyJ. R.SavageR. S. (2008). Can the simple view deal with the complexities of reading?Literacy, 42, 75–82.
35.
LandiN. (2010). An examination of the relationship between reading comprehension, higher-level and lower-level reading sub-skills in adults. Reading and Writing, 23, 701–717.
36.
Language and Reading Research Consortium. (2015). The dimensionality of language ability in young children. Child Development, 86, 1948–1965.
37.
LoniganC. J.BurgessS. R. (2017). Dimensionality of reading skills with elementary-school-age children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21, 239–253.
38.
LoniganC. J.MilburnT. F. (2017). Identifying the dimensionality of oral language skills of children with typical development in preschool through fifth grade. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60, 2185–2198.
MetsalaJ. L.WalleyA. C. (1998). Spoken vocabulary growth and the segmental restructuring of lexical representations: Precursors to phonemic awareness and early reading ability. In MetsalaJ. L.EhriL. C. (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 89–120). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
41.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
42.
NationK.SnowlingM. J. (1997). Assessing reading difficulties: The validity and utility of current measures of reading skill. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 359–370.
OuelletteG.BeersA. (2010). A not-so-simple view of reading: How oral vocabulary and visual-word recognition complicate the story. Reading and Writing, 23, 189–208.
45.
PearsonP. D. (2004). The reading wars. Educational Policy, 18, 216–252.
46.
Ripoll SalcedaJ. C.AlonsoG. A.Castilla-EarlsA. P. (2014). The simple view of reading in elementary school: A systematic review. Revista de Logopedia, Foniatría y Audiología, 34, 17–31.
47.
SabatiniJ. P.SawakiY.ShoreJ. R.ScarboroughH. S. (2010). Relationships among reading skills of adults with low literacy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 122–138.
48.
SemelE.WiigE. H.SecordW. A. (2003). Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals–fourth edition: CELF-4. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
49.
TigheE.SchatschneiderC. (2014). A dominance analysis approach to determining predictor importance in third, seventh, and tenth grade reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 27, 101–127.
50.
TilstraJ.McMasterK.van den BroekP.KendeouP.RappD. (2009). Simple but complex: Components of the simple view of reading across grade levels. Journal of Research in Reading, 32, 383–401.
51.
TiuR. D.RolandoD.ThompsonL. A.LewisB. A. (2003). The role of IQ in a component model of reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 424–436.
52.
TomblinJ. B.ZhangX. (2006). The dimensionality of language ability in school-age children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 1193–1208.
53.
TorgesenJ. K.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A. (1999). Test of Word Reading Efficiency. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
54.
TunmerW. E.ChapmanJ. W. (2012). The simple view of reading redux: Vocabulary knowledge and the independent components hypothesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 453–466.
55.
VeenenddalN. J.GroenM. A.VerhoevenL. (2015). What oral text reading fluency can reveal about reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 38, 213–225.
56.
VellutinoF. R.TunmerW. E.JaccardJ.ChenS. (2007). Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 3–32.
57.
WagnerR. K.HerreraS. K.SpencerM.QuinnJ. M. (2015). Reconsidering the simple view of reading in an intriguing case of equivalent models: Commentary on Tunmer and Chapman (2012). Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 115–119.
58.
WagnerR. K.TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A.HechtS. A.BarkerT. A.BurgessS. R.. . . GaronT. (1997). Changing relations between phonological processing abilities and word-level reading as children develop from beginning to skilled readers: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33, 468–479.
59.
WagnerR. K.TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A.PearsonN. A. (2010). Test of Silent Reading Efficiency and Comprehension. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
60.
WhitehurstG. J.LoniganC. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 848–872.
61.
WoodcockR. W.McGrewK. S.MatherN. (2001). Woodcock–Johnson Tests of Achievement, 3rd edition. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
