The twofold purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine the relative importance of decoding skills to reading comprehension in reading development and to identify which reader characteristics and reading assessment characteristics contribute to differences in the decoding and reading comprehension correlation. A meta-analysis of 110 studies found a sizeable average corrected correlation ( = .74). Two reader characteristics (age and listening comprehension level) were significant moderators of the relationship. Several assessment characteristics were significant moderators, particularly for young readers: the way that decoding was measured and, with respect to the reading comprehension assessment, text genre; whether or not help was provided with decoding; and whether or not the texts were read aloud. Age and measure of decoding were the strongest moderators. We discuss the implications of these findings for assessment and the diagnosis of reading difficulties.
*AaronP. G. (1991). Can reading disabilities be diagnosed without using intelligence tests?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 178–186. doi:10.1177/00222194910 2400306
2.
*AbbottR. D.BerningerV. W.FayolM. (2010). Longitudinal relationships of levels of language in writing and between writing and reading in Grades 1 to 7. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 281–298. doi:10.1037/a0019318
3.
*AchesonD. J.WellsJ. B.MacDonaldM. C. (2008). New and updated tests of print exposure and reading abilities in college students. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 278–289. doi:10.3758BRM.40.1.278
4.
AndreassenR.BråtenI. (2010). Examining the prediction of reading comprehension on different multiple-choice tests. Journal of Research in Reading, 33, 263–283. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01413.x
5.
*ArnellK. M.JoanisseM. F.KleinR. M.BusseriM. A.TannockR. (2009). Decomposing the relation between rapid automatized naming (RAN) and reading ability. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Experimentale, 63, 173–184. doi:10.1037/a0015721
6.
*AshbakerM. H.SwansonH. L. (1996). Short-term memory and working memory operations and their contribution to reading in adolescents with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 11, 206–213.
7.
Bar-HaimY.LamyD.LeeP.Bakermans-KranenburgM. J.van IJzendoornM. V. (2007). Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: A meta-analytic study. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 1–24. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.1
8.
*BellL. C.PerfettiC. A. (1994). Reading skill: Some adult comparisons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 244–255. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.86.2.244
9.
*BenjaminR. G.SchwanenflugelP. J. (2010). Test complexity and oral reading prosody in young readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 388–404. doi:10.1598/RRQ.45.4.2
10.
*BerningerV. W.AbbottR. D.VermeulenK.FultonC. M. (2006). Paths to reading comprehension in at-risk second-grade readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 334–351. doi:10.1177/00222194060390040701
11.
*BestR. M.FloydR. G.McNamaraD. S. (2008). Differential competencies contributing to children’s comprehension of narrative and expository texts. Reading Psychology, 29, 137–164. doi:10.1080/02702710801963951
12.
*BetourneL. S.Friel-PattiS. (2003). Phonological processing and oral language abilities in fourth-grade poor readers. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36, 507–527. doi:10.1016/S0021-9924(03)00035-2
13.
*BlackmoreA. M.PrattC. (1997). Grammatical awareness and reading in Grade 1 children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43, 567–590.
14.
*BrazeD.TaborW.ShankweilerD. P.MenclW. E. (2007). Speaking up for vocabulary: Reading skill differences in young adults. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 226–243. doi:10.1177/00222194070400030401
15.
*BurgoyneK.WhiteleyH.HutchinsonJ. (2011). The development of comprehension and reading-related skills in children learning English as an additional language and their monolingual, English-speaking peers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 344–354. doi:10.1348/000709910X504122
16.
*BurkeM. D.Hagan-BurkeS.KwokO.ParkerR. (2009). Predictive validity of early literacy indicators from the middle of kindergarten to second grade. Journal of Special Education, 42, 209–226. doi:10.1177/0022466907313347
17.
*BurtJ. S.FuryM. B. (2000). Spelling in adults: The role of reading skills and experience. Reading and Writing, 13, 1–30.
18.
*ByrneB.SamuelssonS.WadsworthS.HulslanderJ.CorleyR.DefriesJ. C.. . .OlsonR. K. (2007). Longitudinal twin study of early literacy development: Preschool through Grade 1. Reading and Writing, 20, 77–102. doi:10.1007/s11145-006-9019-9
19.
*CainK. (2007). Syntactic awareness and reading ability: Is there any evidence for a special relationship?Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 679–694. doi:10.1017/S0142716407070361
20.
*CainK.OakhillJ. (2011). Matthew effects in young readers: Reading comprehension and reading experience aid vocabulary development. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 431–443. doi:10.1177/0022219411410042
21.
CainK.OakhillJ.BryantP. E. (2000). Investigating the causes of reading comprehension failure: The comprehension-age match design. Reading and Writing, 12, 31–40.
22.
*CainK.OakhillJ.BryantP. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31–42. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31
23.
*CarlisleJ. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing, 12, 169–190.
24.
CarrollJ. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511571312
25.
*CartwrightK. B. (2007). The contribution of graphophonological-semantic flexibility to reading comprehension in college students: Implications for a less simple view of reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 39, 173–193.
26.
*ChenR. S.VellutinoF. R. (1997). Prediction of reading ability: A cross-validation study of the simple view of reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 29, 1–24. doi:10.1080/10862969709547947
27.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28.
ColemanC.LindstromJ.NelsonJ.LindstromW.GreggK. N. (2010). Passageless comprehension on the Nelson-Denny reading test: Well above chance for university students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 244–249. doi:10.1177/0022219409345017
29.
*ComptonD. L.FuchsD.FuchsL. S.EllemanA. M.GilbertJ. K. (2008). Tracking children who fly below the radar: Latent transition modeling of students with late-emerging reading disability. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 329–337. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2008.04.003
30.
*ConnersF. A. (2009). Attentional control and the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 22, 591–613. doi:10.1007/s11145-008-9126-x
31.
*CromleyJ.AzevedoR. (2011). Measuring strategy use in context with multiple-choice items. Metacognition and Learning, 6, 155–177. doi:10.1007/s11409-011-9070-z
32.
CurtisM. E. (1980). Development of components of reading skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 656–669. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.72.5.656
33.
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. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_5
34.
*DeaconS. H.KirbyJ. R. (2004). Morphological awareness: Just “more phonological”? The roles of morphological and phonological awareness in reading development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 223–238. doi:10.1017/S0142716404001110
35.
*DreyerL. G.KatzL. (1992). An examination of “the simple view of reading.”National Reading Conference Yearbook, 41, 169–175.
36.
EhriL. C.NunesS. R.StahlS. A.WillowsD. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the national reading panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 393–447. doi:10.3102/00346543071003393
37.
*EllemanA. M.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.FuchsL. S.BoutonB. (2011). Exploring dynamic assessment as a means of identifying children at risk of developing comprehension difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 348–357. doi:10.1177/0022219411407865
38.
*FienH.ParkY.BakerS. K.SmithJ. L.StoolmillerM.Kame’enuiE. J. (2010). An examination of the relation of nonsense word fluency initial status and gains to reading outcomes for beginning readers. School Psychology Review, 39, 631–653.
39.
FloritE.CainK. (2011). The simple view of reading: Is it valid for different types of alphabetic orthographies?Educational Psychology Review, 23, 553–576. doi:10.1007/s10648-011-9175-6
40.
FrancisD. J.FletcherJ. M.CattsH.TomblinB. (2004, September). Dimensions affecting the assessment of reading comprehension. Paper presented at the Pacific Region Education Lab Focus on Comprehension Forum, New York, NY.
41.
*FraserJ.Conti-RamsdenG. (2008). Contribution of phonological and broader language skills to literacy. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 43, 552–569. doi:10.1080/13682820701778069
42.
FrederiksenJ. R.WarrenB. M. (1987). A cognitive framework for developing expertise in reading. In GlaserR. (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 1–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
43.
*GevaE.FarniaF. (2012). Developmental changes in the nature of language proficiency and reading fluency paint a more complex view of reading comprehension in ELL and EL1. Reading and Writing, 25, 1819–1845. doi:10.1007/s11145-011-9333-8
44.
GlassG. V.McGawB.SmithM. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
45.
GoughP. B.HooverW. A.PetersonC. L. (1996). Some observations on a simple view of reading. In CornoldiC.OakhillJ. (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties (pp. 1–13). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
GoughP. B.TunmerW. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10. doi:10.1177/074193258600700104
47.
GraesserA.MillisK. K.ZwaanR. A. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 163–189. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.163
48.
*GreenbergD.PaeH. K.MorrisR. D.CalhoonM. B.NandaA. O. (2009). Measuring adult literacy students’ reading skills using the Gray Oral Reading Test. Annals of Dyslexia, 59, 133–149. doi:10.1007/s11881-009-0027-8
49.
*GuthrieJ. T.McRaeA.CoddingtonC. S.KlaudaS. L.WigfieldA.BarbosaP. (2009). Impacts of comprehensive reading instruction on diverse outcomes of low- and high-achieving readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 195–214. doi:10.1177/0022219408331039
50.
*HansenJ.BoweyJ. A. (1994). Phonological analysis skills, verbal working memory, and reading ability in second-grade children. Child Development, 65, 938–950. doi:10.2307/1131429
51.
HarlaarN.DaleP. S.PlominR. (2005). Telephone testing and teacher assessment of reading skills in 7-year-olds: II. Strong genetic overlap. Reading and Writing, 18, 401–423. doi:10.1007/s11145-005-0271-1
52.
*HatcherP. J.HulmeC. (1999). Phonemes, rhymes, and intelligence as predictors of children’s responsiveness to remedial reading instruction: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 130–153. doi:10.1006/jecp.1998.2480
53.
*HechtS. A.BurgessS. R.TorgesenJ. K.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A. (2000). Explaining social class differences in growth of reading skills from beginning kindergarten through fourth-grade: The role of phonological awareness, rate of access, and print knowledge. Reading and Writing, 12, 99–127.
54.
HooverW. A.GoughP. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2, 127–160. doi:10.1007/BF00401799
55.
*HudsonR. F.TorgesenJ. K.LaneH. B.TurnerS. J. (2012). Relations among reading skills and sub-skills and text-level reading proficiency in developing readers. Reading and Writing, 25, 483–507. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9283-6
56.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
57.
*JarmulowiczL.HayS. E.TaranV. L.EthingtonC. A. (2008). Fitting derivational morphophonology into a developmental model of reading. Reading and Writing, 21, 275–297. doi:10.1007/s11145-007-9073-y
58.
*JenkinsJ. R.FuchsL. S.van den BroekP.EspinC.DenoS. L. (2003). Sources of individual differences in reading comprehension and reading fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 719–729. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.719
59.
*JenkinsJ. R.JewellM. (1993). Examining the validity of two measures for formative teaching: Reading aloud and maze. Exceptional Children, 5, 421–432.
60.
JohnstonT. C.KirbyJ. R. (2006). The contribution of naming speed to the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 19, 339–361. doi:10.1007/s11145-005-4644-2
61.
*JoshiR. M.AaronP. G. (2000). The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex. Reading Psychology, 21, 85–97.
62.
JuelC. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.437
63.
JustM. A.CarpenterP. A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
64.
*KatzL.BrancazioL.IrwinJ.KatzS.MagnusonJ.WhalenD. (2012). What lexical decision and naming tell us about reading. Reading and Writing, 25, 1259–1282. doi:10.1007/s11145-011-9316-9
65.
*KatzirT.KimY.WolfM.KennedyB.LovettM.MorrisR. (2006). The relationship of spelling recognition, RAN, and phonological awareness to reading skills in older poor readers and younger reading-matched controls. Reading and Writing, 19, 845–872. doi:10.1007/s11145-006-9013-2
66.
KeenanJ. M.BetjemannR. S. (2006). Comprehending the Gray Oral Reading Test without reading it: Why comprehension tests should not include passage-independent items. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 363–380. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr 1004_2
67.
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, 281–300. doi:10.1080/10888430802132279
68.
KeenanJ. M.BetjemannR. S.WadsworthS. J.DeFriesJ. C.OlsonR. K. (2006). Genetic and environmental influences on reading and listening comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 75–91. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006 .00293.x
69.
*KendeouP.SavageR.van den BroekP. (2009). Revisiting the simple view of reading. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 353–370. doi:10.1348/978185408X369020
70.
*KershawS.SchatschneiderC. (2012). A latent variable approach to the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 25, 433–464. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9278-3
71.
*KershnerJ.MicallefJ. (1991). Cerebral laterality in dyslexic children: Implications for phonological word decoding deficits. Reading and Writing, 3, 395–411. doi:10.1007/BF00354970
72.
*KimY.-S.OtaibaS. A.PuranikC.FolsomJ. S.GreulichL.WagnerR. K. (2011). Componential skills of beginning writing: An exploratory study. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 517–525. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2011.06.004
73.
*KimY.-S.PetscherY.SchatschneiderC.FoormanB. (2010). Does growth rate in oral reading fluency matter in predicting reading comprehension achievement?Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 652–667. doi:10.1037/a0019643
74.
*KimY.-S.WagnerR. K.FosterE. (2011). Relations among oral reading fluency, silent reading fluency, and reading comprehension: A latent variable study of first-grade readers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 338–362. doi:10.1080/10888438.2010.493964
75.
*KimY.-S.WagnerR. K.LopezD. (2012). Developmental relations between reading fluency and reading comprehension: A longitudinal study from grade 1 to grade 2. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113, 93–111. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2012.03.002
76.
KintschW. (1994). Text comprehension, memory, and learning. American Psychologist, 49, 294–303. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.49.4.294
77.
KintschW. (1998). Comprehension. A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
78.
*KirbyJ. R.BallA.GeierB.ParrilaR.Wade-WoolleyL. (2011). The development of reading interest and its relation to reading ability. Journal of Research in Reading, 34, 263–280. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01439.x
79.
*KirbyJ. R.DeaconS.BowersP. N.IzenbergL.Wade-WoolleyL.ParrilaR. (2012). Children’s morphological awareness and reading ability. Reading and Writing, 25, 389–410. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9276-5
80.
*KitzW. R.NashR. T. (1992). Testing the effectiveness of the project success summer program for adult dyslexics. Annals of Dyslexia, 42, 3–24. doi:10.1007/BF02654936
81.
*KlaudaS. L.GuthrieJ. T. (2008). Relationships of three components of reading fluency to reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 310–321. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.310
82.
*KupermanV.Van DykeJ. A. (2011). Effects of individual differences in verbal skills on eye-movement patterns during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 42–73. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.03.002
83.
*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. doi:10.1007/s11145-009-9180-z
84.
*LeatherC. V.HenryL. A. (1994). Working memory span and phonological awareness tasks as predictors of early reading ability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 58, 88–111. doi:10.1006/jecp.1994.1027
85.
*LeeJ. (2011). Size matters: Early vocabulary as a predictor of language and literacy competence. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 69–92. doi:10.1017/S0142716410000299
86.
*LesauxN. K.LipkaO.SiegelL. S. (2006). Investigating cognitive and linguistic abilities that influence the reading comprehension skills of children from diverse linguistic backgrounds. Reading and Writing, 19, 99–131. doi:10.1007/s11145-005-4713-6
87.
LipseyM. M.WilsonD. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis (applied social research methods). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
88.
*MacArthurC. A.KonoldT. R.GluttingJ. J.AlampreseJ. A. (2010). Reading component skills of learners in adult basic education. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 108–121. doi:10.1177/0022219409359342
89.
MacaskillP.WalterS. D.IrwingL. (2001). A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 20, 641–654. doi:10.1002/sim.698
*ManisF. R.SeidenbergM. S.DoiL. M. (1999). See Dick RAN: Rapid naming and the longitudinal prediction of reading subskills in first and second graders. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 129–157. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0302_3
92.
*MartinoN. L.HoffmanP. R. (2002). An investigation of reading and language abilities of college freshmen. Journal of Research in Reading, 25, 310–318. doi:10.1111/1467-9817.00178
93.
*McCutchenD.LoganB. (2011). Inside incidental word learning: Children’s strategic use of morphological information to infer word meanings. Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 334–349. doi:10.1002/RRQ.003
94.
*McCutchenD.LoganB.Biangardi-OrpeU. (2009). Making meaning: Children’s sensitivity to morphological information during word reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 360–376. doi:10.1598/RRQ.44.4.4
95.
*MeisingerE. B.BradleyB. A.SchwanenflugelP. J.KuhnM. R.MorrisR. D. (2009). Myth and reality of the word caller: The relation between teacher nominations and prevalence among elementary school children. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 147–159. doi:10.1037/a0017191
96.
*MellardD.WoodsK.DesaM. D. (2012). An oral reading fluency assessment for young adult career and technical education students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27, 125–135. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2012.00358.x
97.
*MellardD. F.FallE.WoodsK. L. (2010). A path analysis of reading comprehension for adults with low literacy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 154–165. doi:10.1177/0022219409359345
98.
*MesserD.DockrellJ. E.MurphyN. (2004). Relation between naming and literacy in children with word-finding difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 462–470. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.462
99.
*MillerJ.SchwanenflugelP. J. (2008). A longitudinal study of the development of reading prosody as a dimension of oral reading fluency in early elementary school children. Reading Research Quarterly, 43, 336–354. doi:10.1598/RRQ.43.4.2
100.
*MuterV.HulmeC.SnowlingM. J.StevensonJ. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and grammatical skills as foundations of early reading development: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 40, 665–681. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.5.665
101.
*NagyW.BerningerV.AbbottR.VaughanK.VermeulenK. (2003). Relationship of morphology and other language skills to literacy skills in at-risk second-grade readers and at-risk fourth-grade writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 730–742. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.730
102.
NationK.SnowlingM. (1997). Assessing reading difficulties: The validity and utility of current measures of reading skill. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 359–370. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1997.tb01250.x
103.
NationK.SnowlingM. J. (1998). Individual differences in contextual facilitation: Evidence from dyslexia and poor reading comprehension. Child Development, 69, 996–1011. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06157.x
NealeM. D. (1997). Neale Analysis of Reading Ability–Revised. Windsor, England: National Foundation for Educational Research.
106.
NealeM. D.ChristophersU.WhettonC. (1989). The Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (Revised British ed.). Windsor, England: National Foundation for Educational Research.
*NobleK. G.FarahM. J.McCandlissB. D. (2006). Socioeconomic background modulates cognition-achievement relationships in reading. Cognitive Development, 21, 349–368. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2006.01.007
109.
*NunesT.BryantP.BarrosR. (2012). The development of word recognition and its significance for comprehension and fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 959–973. doi:10.1037/a0027412
110.
*OakhillJ.CainK.BryantP. E. (2003). The dissociation of word reading and text comprehension: Evidence from component skills. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 443–468. doi:10.1080/01690960344000008
111.
*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. doi:10.1007/s11145-008-9159-1
112.
PalmerJ.MacLeodC. M.HuntE.DavidsonJ. E. (1985). Information processing correlates of reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 59–88. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(85)90016-6
113.
ParrilaR.GeorgiouG.CorkettJ. (2007). University students with a significant history of reading difficulties: What is and is not compensated?Exceptionality Education Canada, 17, 195–220.
114.
PerfettiC. (1985). Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
115.
PerfettiC. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 357–383. doi:10.1080/10888430701530730
116.
*PritchardR. E.RomeoG. C. (2000). Reading ability as a predictor of student success in business school. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 13, 23–26.
117.
ProtopapasA.MouzakiA.SideridisG. D.KotsolakouA.SimosP. G. (2013). The role of vocabulary in the context of the simple view of reading. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 29, 168–202. doi:10.1080/10573569.2013.758569
118.
ProtopapasA.SimosP. G.SideridisG. D.MouzakiA. (2012). The components of the simple view of reading: A confirmatory factor analysis. Reading Psychology, 33, 217–240. doi:10.1080/02702711.2010.507626
119.
*RickettsJ.BishopD. V.PimpertonH.NationK. (2011). The role of self-teaching in learning orthographic and semantic aspects of new words. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 47–70. doi:10.1080/10888438.2011.536129
120.
*RickettsJ.NationK.BishopD. V. M. (2007). Vocabulary is important for some, but not all reading skills. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 235–257. doi:10.1080/10888430701344306
*RupleyW. H.WillsonV. L. (1997). Relationship between reading comprehension and components of word recognition: Support for developmental shifts. Journal of Research & Development in Education, 30, 255–260.
123.
*SabatiniJ. P. (2002). Efficiency in word reading of adults: Ability group comparisons. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 267–298. doi:10.1207/S1532799XSSR0603_4
124.
*SabatiniJ. P.SawakiY.ShoreJ. R.ScarboroughH. S. (2010). Relationships among reading skills of adults with low literacy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 122–138. doi:10.1177/0022219409359343
125.
SánchezE.GarcíaJ. R.GonzalezA. J. (2007). Can differences in the ability to recognize words cease to have an effect under certain reading conditions?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 290–306. doi:10.1177/00222194070400040101
126.
*SavageR. (2001). The “simple view” of reading: Some evidence and possible implications. Educational Psychology in Practice, 17, 17–33. doi:10.1080/02667360123356
127.
SavageR. (2006). Reading comprehension is not always the product of nonsense word decoding and linguistic comprehension: Evidence from teenagers who are extremely poor readers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 143–164. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1002_2
128.
*SavageR.WolforthJ. (2007). An additive simple view of reading describes the performance of good and poor readers in higher education. Exceptionality Education Canada, 17, 243–268.
129.
SeymourP. H. K. (2005). Early reading development in European orthographies. In SnowlingM.HulmeC. (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 296–315). Oxford, England: Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9780470757642.ch16
130.
*ShinnM. R.GoodR. H.IIIKnutsonN.TillyW. D.IIICollinsV. L. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: A confirmatory analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 459–479.
131.
SparksR. L.PattonJ.GanschowL.HumbachN. (2008). Early first-language reading and spelling skills predict later second-language reading and spelling skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 162–174. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.162
132.
*Spear-SwerlingL. (2004). Fourth graders’ performance on a state-mandated assessment involving two different measures of reading comprehension. Reading Psychology, 25, 121–148. doi:10.1080/02702710490435727
133.
*SpeddingS.ChanL. K. (1993). Metacognition, word identification, and reading competence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 91–100. doi:10.1006/ceps.1993.1009
134.
*SpeeceD. L.RitcheyK. D.SilvermanR.SchatschneiderC.WalkerC. Y.AndrusikK. N. (2010). Identifying children in middle childhood who are at risk for reading problems. School Psychology Review, 39, 258–276.
135.
*SpoonerA. L. R.BaddeleyA. D.GathercoleS. E. (2004). Can reading accuracy and comprehension be separated in the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability?British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 187–204. doi:10.1348/000709904773839833
136.
StanovichK. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–406. doi:10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1
137.
StothardS. E.HulmeC. (1992). Reading comprehension difficulties in children: The role of language comprehension and working memory skills. Reading and Writing, 4, 245–256. doi:10.1007/BF01027150
138.
*StuartM. (2004). Getting ready for reading: A follow-up study of inner city second language learners at the end of Key Stage 1. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 15–36. doi:10.1348/000709904322848806
139.
StuartM.StainthorpR.SnowlingM. (2008). Literacy as a complex activity: Deconstructing the simple view of reading. Literacy, 42, 59–74. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4369.2008.00490.x
140.
SuY. L.ReeveJ. (2011). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to support autonomy. Educational Psychology Review, 23, 159–188. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9142-7
141.
*SwansonH. L.BerningerV. (1995). The role of working memory in skilled and less skilled readers’ comprehension. Intelligence, 21, 83–108. doi:10.1016/0160-2896(95)90040-3
142.
*TaftM. (2001). Processing of orthographic structure by adults of different reading ability. Language and Speech, 44, 351–376. doi:10.1177/00238309010440030301
143.
*TaylorH. B.AnthonyJ. L.AgharaR.SmithK. E.LandryS. H. (2008). The interaction of early maternal responsiveness and children’s cognitive abilities on later decoding and reading comprehension skills. Early Education and Development, 19, 188–207. doi:10.1080/10409280701839304
144.
*TaylorN. A.GreenbergD.Laures-GoreJ.WiseJ. C. (2012). Exploring the syntactic skills of struggling adult readers. Reading and Writing, 25, 1385–1402. doi:10.1007/s11145-011-9324-9
145.
*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. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01401.x
146.
*TorgesenJ. K.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A.BurgessS.HechtS. (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. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0102_4
147.
*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. doi:10.1177/0022219411432685
148.
*VadasyP. F.SandersE. A. (2008). Code-oriented instruction for kindergarten students at risk for reading difficulties: A replication and comparison of instructional groupings. Reading and Writing, 21, 929–963. doi:10.1007/s11145-008-9119-9
149.
*ValenciaS. W.SmithA. T.ReeceA. M.LiM.WixsonK. K.NewmanH. (2010). Oral reading fluency assessment: Issues of construct, criterion, and consequential validity. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 270–291. doi:10.1598/RRQ.45.3.1
150.
van DijkT. A.KintschW. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York, NY: Academic Press.
151.
van SteenselR.McElvanyN.KurversJ.HerppichS. (2011). How effective are family literacy programs? Results of a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 81, 69–96. doi:10.3102/0034654310388819
152.
*VellutinoF. R.TunmerW. E.JaccardJ. J.ChenR. S. (2007). Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 3–32. doi:10.1080/10888430709336632
153.
WalczykJ. J. (2000). The interplay between automatic and control processes in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 554–566. doi:10.1598/RRQ.35.4.7
154.
*WeemsS. A.ZaidelE. (2004). The relationship between reading ability and lateralized lexical decision. Brain and Cognition, 55, 507–515. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004.03.001
155.
*WelcomeS. E.ChiarelloC.HaldermanL. K.LeonardC. M. (2009). Lexical processing skill in college-age resilient readers. Reading and Writing, 22, 353–371. doi:10.1007/s11145-008-9120-3
156.
*WelcomeS. E.JoanisseM. F. (2012). Individual differences in skilled adult readers reveal dissociable patterns of neural activity associated with component processes of reading. Brain and Language, 120, 360–371. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2011.12.011
157.
*WhalleyK.HansenJ. (2006). The role of prosodic sensitivity in children’s reading development. Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 288–303. doi:10.1111/ j.1467-9817.2006.00309.x
158.
WiederholtJ. L.BryantB. R. (1992). Gray Oral Reading Test (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
159.
WilliamsJ. P. (2005). Instruction in reading comprehension for primary-grade students: A focus on text structure. Journal of Special Education, 39, 6–18. doi:10.1177/00224669050390010201
WimmerH.GoswamiU. (1994). The influence of orthographic consistency on reading development: Word recognition in English and German children. Cognition, 51, 91–103. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90010-8
162.
*WiseJ. C.SevcikR. A.MorrisR. D.LovettM. W.WolfM. (2007). The relationship among receptive and expressive vocabulary, listening comprehension, pre-reading skills, word identification skills, and reading comprehension by children with reading disabilities. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 1093–1109. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/076)
163.
*WiseJ. C.SevcikR. A.MorrisR. D.LovettM. W.WolfM.KuhnM.. . .SchwanenflugelP. (2010). The relationship between different measures of oral reading fluency and reading comprehension in second-grade students who evidence different oral reading fluency difficulties. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41, 340–348. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2009/08-0093)
164.
*WoodD. E. (2009). Modeling the relationships between cognitive and reading measures in third and fourth grade children. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27, 96–112. doi:10.1177/0734282908323609
165.
*WoodF. B.FeltonR. H. (1994). Separate linguistic and attentional factors in the development of reading. Topics in Language Disorders, 14, 42–57. doi:10.1097/00011363-199408000-00005
166.
WoodcockR. N. (1987). Woodcock Reading Mastery Test–Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
167.
*ZinarS. (2000). The relative contributions of word identification skill and comprehension-monitoring behavior to reading comprehension ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 363–377. doi:10.1006/ceps.2000.1024
168.
*ZipkeM.EhriL. C.CairnsH. S. (2009). Using semantic ambiguity instruction to improve third graders’ metalinguistic awareness and reading comprehension: An experimental study. Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 300–321. doi:10.1598/RRQ.44.3.4
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.
