Reading and Listening to Expository Text

1985 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalind Horowitz ◽  
S. Jay Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Oral Reading ◽  
Process Model ◽  
Expository Text ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Poor Reading ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

Poor reading comprehension may result from a general comprehension problem, a decoding problem, or a combination of these problems. Using a counterbalanced design, 38 good and poor sixth-grade readers read aloud and listened to easy and hard texts. Immediately after reading and listening, students orally retold what they had read or heard. Their recalls were scored for number of idea units produced. Results indicated no difference in listening comprehension between good and poor readers for either easy or hard texts, but a significant difference in oral reading comprehension in favor of good readers on both easy and hard texts. The finding of no difference in listening suggests that the poor readers in this sample did not have a general comprehension problem, while their poor oral reading performance indicates that they did have a decoding problem. These findings support a more complex comprehension process model of listening and reading than has typically been described in the literature.

Effects of Reading Ability on Children's Comprehension Evaluation and Regulation

1989 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Zabrucky ◽  
Hilary Horn Ratner
Keyword(s):  
Reading Ability ◽  
Verbal Report ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Comprehension Monitoring ◽  
Verbal Reports ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
On Line ◽  
Good And Poor Readers ◽  
Multidimensional Process

Good and poor readers in the sixth grade ( M age = 11.92 years) were videotaped reading inconsistent stories presented one sentence at a time. Children's comprehension evaluation was assessed with on-line (reading times) and verbal report measures; comprehension regulation was assessed by examining look-backs during reading. All children read inconsistencies more slowly than consistent control information but good readers were more likely than poor readers to look back at inconsistencies during reading, to give accurate verbal reports of passage consistency following reading, and to recall text inconsistencies. Results highlight the importance of using multiple comprehension monitoring measures in assessing children's abilities and of treating comprehension monitoring as a multidimensional process.

scholarly journals Psycholinguistic Processing in Reading and Listening among Good and Poor Readers

1976 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 415-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Guthrie ◽  
S. Jane Tyler
Keyword(s):  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Silent Reading ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

Differences in psycholinguistic processing of written and spoken language, and psycholinguistic deficiencies of poor readers were studied by giving meaningful, anomalous and random word strings to 18 good and 18 poor readers. In both spoken and written conditions the order of recall was meaningful > anomalous > random (p < .001), suggesting that syntactic and semantic demands of spoken and written sentences were similar. Poor readers were inferior to good readers on written presentations (p > .05). The groups were similar on spoken presentations. The reading comprehension deficiency could not be attributed to inadequate psycholinguistic processing, memory or automaticity in decoding. Incomplete decoding during silent reading by poor readers was supported as an explanation.

scholarly journals Text Type and Reader Ability: The Effects on Paraphrase and Text-Based Inference Questions

1985 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary W. Olson
Keyword(s):  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Logical Inference ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Text Type ◽  
Good And Poor Readers ◽  
Decoding Accuracy

This study investigated good and poor readers' ability to answer text-based inference and paraphrase questions after reading two narrative stories and two expository passages. Subjects were selected that differed only on reading comprehension, not decoding accuracy or language comprehension, and were asked text-based informational and logical inference questions which were classified according to the Warren, Nicholas, and Trabasso (1979) inference taxonomy. Subjects were also asked questions that paraphrased the verbatim information in the text. Dependent measures were researcher-designed questions and reading times for each text. Results indicate that (a) logical text-based inference questions were significantly more difficult to answer than either informational inference questions or paraphrase questions, but only after reading narrative stories; (b) paraphrase questions were as difficult to answer as informational inference questions on both types of text; (c) expository passages were significantly more difficult for the children to understand than narrative stories; (d) good readers answered significantly more text-based inference questions and paraphrase questions than poor readers on both types of text; and (e) good readers read the texts faster than poor readers.

scholarly journals Metacontrast masking as a measure of change detection: Children with poor reading fluency show impaired change detection for both letters and shapes

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Crewther ◽  
Jacqueline Rutkowski ◽  
Sheila Crewther
Keyword(s):  
Visual Attention ◽  
Change Detection ◽  
Reading Fluency ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Random Noise ◽  
Letter Recognition ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Poor Reading ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

AbstractDevelopmental dyslexia, a specific learning difficulty in reading, manifests as effortful decoding of words and as such is commonly associated with reduced phonemic awareness. However, its underlying cause remains elusive, with magnocellular visual processing, temporal auditory processing, visual attentional deficits and cerebellar dysfunction all gaining some traction. More recent theories have concerned visual attention span, measuring the parallel attentive capacity of the sensory visual system. However the VA span task as implemented requires reports, both conscious recall and recognition of letters, that activate many cortical areas beyond sensory visual cortex. Change detection, in contrast, does not require the conscious recognition of items, but simply awareness that the stimulus has changed, or not, again testing visual attention in a parallel fashion, but avoiding the complications of higher order cognitive processes. Thus, we investigated change detection in 33 good and poor readers with ages of around 10 yr, using a gap paradigm. Groups of 4 letters or 4 shapes were presented for a fixed time (0.7 s), followed after a 0.25 s gap, by a second similar group, each item surrounded by an annular frame filled with dynamic random noise of variable contrast. Detection performance was manipulated by varying the contrast of these meta-contrast mask frames, yielding a threshold contrast of the frames at which participants could just detect change. In two separate experiments, letters and rectangular shapes were used as target items, in order to test whether previous findings of superior change detection in good compared with poor readers was a result of greater automaticity in letter recognition of the good readers. The results indicate that the good readers were able to detect change at higher levels of masking distraction for both the letter and shape targets, indicating that this difference is not specifically related to to the training of graphemic or lexical information but more likely reflects a difference in alerting or pre-recognition stages of visual processing. Together, the results provide further support of the notion that there is a low level attentional performance difference between dyslexic and normal reading children. Thus, the results further bring transient spatial attention directly into the spotlight as an ability critical for learning to read.

scholarly journals Cognitive and Motivational Determinants of Reading Comprehension in Good and Poor Readers

1993 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-France Ehrlich ◽  
Beth Kurtz-Costes ◽  
Catherine Loridant
Keyword(s):  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Text Processing ◽  
Predictor Variable ◽  
Perceived Competence ◽  
Metacognitive Knowledge ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational factors were examined as predictors of individual differences in the reading comprehension abilities of good and poor readers. Two hundred twenty seventh graders were measured on reading comprehension, and the top 30% and bottom 30% were identified as good and poor readers, respectively. Subjects were then measured on word recognition, metacognitive knowledge about text processing, perceived competence, and attributional beliefs about the reasons underlying academic outcomes. The results indicated that good readers in comparison to poor readers scored higher on the word recognition measure, possessed richer metacognitive knowledge, and had more positive beliefs about their academic abilities. Regression analyses indicated that word recognition and metacognition predicted reading comprehension in the whole sample; however, regression analyses within subgroups indicated that word recognition was the most important predictor variable for poor readers, whereas perceived competence predicted the reading comprehension abilities of good readers.

scholarly journals Effects of Passage Type on Comprehension Monitoring and Recall in Good and Poor Readers

1992 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Zabrucky ◽  
Hilary Horn Ratner
Keyword(s):  
Error Detection ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Comprehension Monitoring ◽  
Verbal Reports ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Look Back ◽  
On Line ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

An error detection paradigm was used to assess the effects of passage type on students' comprehension monitoring and recall of texts. Good and poor readers in the sixth grade ( M age =12 years, 0 months) read inconsistent expository and narrative passages presented one sentence at a time. On- and off-line measures (reading times and verbal reports of passage inconsistencies) were used to examine students' comprehension evaluation, and look-backs to inconsistencies during reading were used to measure comprehension regulation. Although all students detected problems on-line, good readers were better able to verbally report on passage consistency following reading. Passage type affected regulation of understanding with students more likely to look back at inconsistencies in narratives but not expository passages. Students were more likely to reread expository passages, however, when passages did not contain problems and were less able to recall expository passage information. Implications for instruction and directions for future research are discussed.

The Application of the Boder Test of Reading-Spelling Patterns To the Assessment of Learning Disabilities in French Immersion Poor Readers

1988 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-70
Author(s):  
Corrinne A. Wiss ◽  
Wendy Burnett
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
French Immersion ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Reading Problems ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Spelling Errors ◽  
Assessment Of Learning ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

The Boder Test of Reading-Spelling Patterns (Boder & Jarrico, 1982) is a widely used method for screening and defining reading problems at the level of the word. In order to apply this method in another language, in this case French, criteria for determining what constitutes a good phonetic equivalent for a misspelled word are required. It is essential to know which errors differentiate good and poor readers since errors that are commonly made by good readers are not diagnostic. This paper reports guidelines which have been developed by analyzing spelling errors in a sample of good and poor French immersion readers. These criteria for good phonetic equivalents can be applied, along with the method outlined in the Boder test manual, and used as an assessment tool for screening decoding and encoding problems in French immersion children. When used in conjunction with the English test, the assessment provides bilingual comparisons and guidelines for remedial programming.

The Pronunciation of Familiar, Unfamiliar and Synthetic Words by Good and Poor Adolescent Readers

1976 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra S. Smiley ◽  
Frank L. Pasquale ◽  
Cristine L. Chandler
Keyword(s):  
Word List ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Fifth Grade ◽  
Second Grade ◽  
Seventh Grade ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Adolescent Readers ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Actual Word

The word pronunciations of good and poor seventh-grade readers were compared to second-, fifth-, and sixth-grade readers previously tested on similar lists of actual and synthetic words. On the actual word list, poor readers correctly pronounced about the same number of words as a combined group of normal second- and fifth-grade readers, but fewer words than did the seventh-grade good readers. On the synthetic word list, the performance of the poor readers was comparable to good seventh-grade readers except for the long vowels where their performance most closely resembled poor second-grade readers. The implications of this pattern of results are discussed.

Auditory Evoked Responses to Similar Words with Phonemic Difference: Comparison between Children with Good and Poor Reading Scores

2001 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 160-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Valencia ◽  
Gloria B. McAnulty ◽  
Deborah P. Waber ◽  
Frank H. Duffy
Keyword(s):  
Poor Reader ◽  
Auditory Evoked Potentials ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Poor Reading ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Parietal Area ◽  
Long Latency ◽  
Lower Amplitude ◽  
Reader Group ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

Our previous study demonstrated a physiologic deficit in two-tone discrimination in poor readers. 1 This was specific to the left parietal area suggesting that poor readers handled rapid tones differently. The current paper extends this finding in the same population, demonstrating that poor readers also have difficulty with phonemic discrimination. Long latency auditory evoked potentials (AEP) were formed using a phonemic discrimination task in a group of children with reading disabilities and controls. Measuring peak-to-peak amplitude of the waveforms, we found reduced N1-P2 amplitude in the Poor Reader group. Using the t-statistic significance probability map (SPM) technique, we also found a group difference, maximal over the mid-parietal area, from 584 msec to 626 msec after the stimulus onset. This difference was due to a lower amplitude on the Poor Reader group. We hypothesized that this late difference constitutes a P3 response and that the Poor Reader group generated smaller P3 waves. These auditory evoked response (AER) data support a discrimination deficit for close phonemes in the Poor Reader group as they had smaller N1-P2 absolute amplitude and developed smaller P3 waves. Based on these data we should be able to differentiate between Good and Poor readers based on long latency potentials created from phonemic stimuli.

scholarly journals Eye Movement Dynamics of Good and Poor Readers: Then and Now

1979 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lester A. Lefton ◽  
Richard J. Nagle ◽  
Gwendolyn Johnson ◽  
Dennis F. Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Fifth Graders ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Movement Behavior ◽  
Poor Reading ◽  
Movement Dynamics ◽  
Reading Text ◽  
One Year ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

While reading text, the eye movements of good and poor reading fifth graders, third graders and adults were assessed. Subjects were tested in two sessions one year apart. Dependent variables included the duration and frequency of forward going fixations and regressions; an analysis of individual differences was also made. Results showed that poor reading fifth graders have relatively unsystematic eye movement behavior with many more fixations of longer duration than other fifth graders and adults. The eye movements of poor readers are quantitatively and qualitatively different than those of normal readers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document