The Determinants of Reading Comprehension

Educational and Psychological Measurement (Impact Factor: 1.15). 07/1962; 22(2):269-286. DOI: 10.1177/001316446202200203


To determine the relative variance of test content, method, and error components, parallel forms of 7 specially constructed vocabulary and reading tests were administered to 108 British and 75 American college students. Although the results did not support Vernon's belief that method factors would have the strongest influence, higher validities were obtained with a reading test employing an unconventional method. "Centroid factor analyses revealed a strong Comprehension factor, orthogonal to the Vocabulary factor, among both groups in the reading tests." Several general observations are also offered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

3 Reads
  • Source
    • "It is also argue that two factors underlie reading comprehension. These include either " vocabulary, " " decoding, " or " literal reading " as the first factor and " comprehension " or " inferential reading " as the second factor (Johnson & Reynolds, 1941; Pettit & Cockriel, 1974; Stoker & Kropp, 1960; Vernon, 1962). In summary, different reading component skills have been proposed for different reading tests. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cognitive diagnostic models (CDMs) have great promise for providing diagnostic information to aid learning and instruction, and a large number of CDMs have been proposed. However, the assumptions and performances of different CDMs and their applications in regard to reading comprehension tests are not fully understood. In the present study, we compared the performance of a saturated model (G-DINA), two compensatory models (DINO, ACDM), and two non-compensatory models (DINA, RRUM) with the Michigan English Language Assessment Battery (MELAB) reading test. Compared to the saturated G-DINA model, the ACDM showed comparable model fit and similar skill classification results. The RRUM was slightly worse than the ACDM and G-DINA in terms of model fit and classification results, whereas the more restrictive DINA and DINO performed much worse than the other three models. The findings of this study highlighted the process and considerations pertinent to model selection in applications of CDMs with reading tests.
    Language Testing 07/2015; DOI:10.1177/0265532215590848 · 1.11 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: "The analysis of test-wiseness proposed in this paper is intended to serve as a framework to study its importance. If it does make a significant difference, it would be desirable to seek ways to reduce differences in test-wiseness among examinees in order to provide more valid estimates of their actual abilities and achievement levels." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
    Educational and Psychological Measurement 10/1965; 25(3):707-726. DOI:10.1177/001316446502500304 · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Training adults to read more effectively has become a successful business, as measured by participation in training programs. Advertising emphasis on increasing reading speed by three or four times while comprehending as much or even more has a great appeal to a large adult population. Investigation into the field of reading improvement discloses that there may well be a significant discrepancy between advertised claims of improvement and actual results attained. Reading is a complex skill not easily changed; tests used to measure change are often inadequate and misleading; and payoff in job performance is simply not known regardless of claims. More attention should be given to the kind of training required to produce significant results.
    IEEE Transactions on Engineering Writing and Speech 01/1968; 10(2):52-56. DOI:10.1109/TEWS.1967.4322305
Show more

Similar Publications