ArticleScientific studies of reading : the official journal of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading2023
Executive Functions and Morphological Awareness Explain the Shared Variance Between Word Reading and Listening Comprehension.
Article in Scientific studies of reading : the official journal of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Executive Functions on Metaphonological Skills: Correlation and Treatment Implication for ADHD Children.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Morphological awareness shows a more robust unique association with reading comprehension than phonological awareness in Chinese children in Grades 3-5.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Contributions of Executive Functions To Listening Comprehension and Mediation Effects of Verbal IQ among Chinese Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2025Article
- Longitudinal trajectories of brain development from infancy to school age and their relationship with literacy development.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Longitudinal trajectories of brain development from infancy to school age and their relationship to literacy development.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Towards a dynamic, comprehensive conceptualization of dyslexia.Annals of dyslexia · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: A large body of literature showed that word reading and listening comprehension-two proximal predictors of reading comprehension according to the simple view of reading-are related. Grounded on the direct and indirect effects model of reading (Kim, 2020a, 2020b, 2023), we examined the extent to which the relation is explained by domain-general cognitions or executive functions (working memory and attentional control) and emergent literacy skills (language and code-related skills including morphological awareness, phonological awareness, orthographic pattern recognition, letter naming fluency, and rapid automatized naming). Method: Data were from English-speaking children in Grade 1 ( Results: Results from structural equation models showed that word reading and listening comprehension were moderately related (.54). When working memory and attentional control were included as predictors, the relation became weaker (.39). When morphological awareness was additionally included, they were no longer related (.05). The other emergent literacy skills did not add explanatory power beyond executive functions and morphological awareness. Conclusion: These results indicate that executive functions and morphological awareness largely explain the shared variance between word reading and listening comprehension for English-speaking beginning readers.
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.