Much research has supported the assertion of Hooper, et al.'s 1994 claims that specific stimuli perform better than others in eliciting well-developed written responses; however, previous research was conducted with raters who were aware of the hypotheses. The present study of 29 middle school children validated previous support for Hooper, et al.'s assertions by implementing blind rating and, once again, finding that significant differences between Hooper-like and non-Hooper-like prompts existed for structural items but not for items of mechanics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CohenJ. (1988) Statistical power analyses for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2.
CohenJ. (1992) A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.
3.
ColeJ. C.HaleyK. A.MuenzT. A. (1997) Written expression reviewed. Research in the Schools, 4, 17–34.
4.
ColeJ. C.McLeodJ. S. (1999) Children's written expression: The impact of the pictorial stimulus. Psychology in the Schools, 36, 101–112.
5.
ColeJ. C.MuenzT. A.OuchiB. Y.KaufmanN. L.KaufmanA. S. (1997) The impact of the pictorial stimulus on the written expression output. Psychology in the Schools, 34, 1–9.
6.
HooperS. R.MontgomeryJ.SwartzC.ReedM. S.SandlerA. D.LevineM. D.WatsonT. E.WasileskiT. (1994) Measurement of written language expression. In LyonG. R. (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. Pp. 375–417.
7.
MarkwardtF. C.Jr. (1989) Peabody Individual Achievement Test-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
8.
McLeodJ. S.BoyerK. M.OuchiB. Y.ColeJ. C.CallaghanR. L. (1999) Exploring effects of different pictorial stimuli on written expression. Psychological Reports, 84, 1225–1234.
9.
MuenzT. A.OuchiB. Y.ColeJ. C. (1999) Item analysis of written expression scoring systems from the PIAT–R and WIAT. Psychology in the Schools, 35, 31–40.
10.
OuchiB. Y.ColeJ. C.MuenzT. A.KaufmanA. S.KaufmanN. L. (1996) Interrater reliability of the written expression subtest of the Peabody Individual Achievement Test-Revised: An adolescent and adult sample. Psychological Reports, 79, 1239–1247.
