ArticleScientific reports2021
Rapid online assessment of reading ability.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual processing is a language-agnostic window into heterogeneity in early reading development.Current biology : CB · 2026Article
- Similarities (and Differences) in the Learning Patterns of Single-Word Reading of an Alphabetic Orthography in Monolingual and Bilingual Primary School Children: A Cross-Sectional Study.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Reading ability conflates SES creativity gaps.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
- A fair lexical decision task for monolingual and multilingual Spanish-speakers.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Gender and home language effects on vocabulary skills among school children aged 9-15 in Finland.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An introduction to the Item Response Warehouse (IRW): A resource for enhancing data usage in psychometrics.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- ROAR-CAT: Rapid Online Assessment of Reading ability with Computerized Adaptive Testing.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Assessing handwriting skills in a web browser: Development and validation of an automated online test in Japanese Kanji.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Evaluating correlations between reading ability and psychophysical measurements of dynamic visual information processing in Japanese adults.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Contextual diversity and anchoring: Null effects on learning word forms and opposing effects on learning word meanings.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2024Article
- Rapid online assessment of reading and phonological awareness (ROAR-PA).Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Examining the Impact of Reading Fluency on Lexical Decision Results in French 6th Graders.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2024Article
- The Web-based Open-access Reliable Decision on Synonyms (WORDS) English Vocabulary Test.Journal of cognition · 2024Article
- Understanding the interplay between executive functions and reading development: A challenge for researchers and practitioners alike.Mind, brain and education : the official journal of the International Mind, Brain, and Education Society · 2023Article
- Designing Virtual, Moderated Studies of Early Childhood Development.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Enhancing online speech and language assessment: Item development for the remote adult language experiment (ReAL-E) tool.Journal of communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An accurate model of the factors that contribute to individual differences in reading ability depends on data collection in large, diverse and representative samples of research participants. However, that is rarely feasible due to the constraints imposed by standardized measures of reading ability which require test administration by trained clinicians or researchers. Here we explore whether a simple, two-alternative forced choice, time limited lexical decision task (LDT), self-delivered through the web-browser, can serve as an accurate and reliable measure of reading ability. We found that performance on the LDT is highly correlated with scores on standardized measures of reading ability such as the Woodcock-Johnson Letter Word Identification test (r = 0.91, disattenuated r = 0.94). Importantly, the LDT reading ability measure is highly reliable (r = 0.97). After optimizing the list of words and pseudowords based on item response theory, we found that a short experiment with 76 trials (2-3 min) provides a reliable (r = 0.95) measure of reading ability. Thus, the self-administered, Rapid Online Assessment of Reading ability (ROAR) developed here overcomes the constraints of resource-intensive, in-person reading assessment, and provides an efficient and automated tool for effective online research into the mechanisms of reading (dis)ability.
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.