ArticleReading and writing2020
Executive functions and components of oral reading fluency through the lens of text complexity.
Article in Reading and writing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The relationship between cognitive skills and reading comprehension of narrative and expository texts: A longitudinal study from Grade 1 to Grade 4.Learning and individual differences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
As readers struggle to coordinate various reading- and language-related skills during oral reading fluency (ORF), miscues can emerge, especially when processing complex texts. Following a miscue, students often self-correct as a strategy to potentially restore ORF and online linguistic comprehension. Executive functions (EF) are hypothesized to play an interactive role during ORF. Yet, the role of EF in self-corrections while reading complex texts remains elusive. To this end, we evaluated the relation between students' probability of self-correcting miscues-or P(SC)-and their EF profile in a cohort of 143 participants (aged 9-15) who represented a diverse spectrum of reading abilities. Moreover, we used experimentally-manipulated passages (decoding, vocabulary, syntax, and cohesion) and employed a fully cross-classified mixed-effects multilevel regression strategy to evaluate the interplay between components of ORF, EF, and text complexity. Our results revealed that, after controlling for reading and language abilities, increased production of miscues across different passage conditions was explained by worse EF. We also found that students with better EF exhibited greater P(SC) when reading complex texts. While text complexity taxes students' EF and influences their production of miscues, findings suggest that EF may be interactively recruited to restore ORF via self-correcting oral reading errors. Overall, our results suggest that domain-general processes (e.g., EF) are associated with production of miscues and may underlie students' behavior of self-corrections, especially when reading complex texts. Further understanding of the relation between different components of ORF and cognitive processes may inform intervention strategies to improve reading proficiency and overall academic performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.