Inadequate responders to fourth-grade reading intervention show lower verbal knowledge and listening comprehension than adequate responders and typical readers¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 Inadequate responders (both comprehension-only and comprehension-plus-word-reading groups) scored significantly lower than adequate responders on verbal knowledge and listening comprehension after intervention. → Cho Eunsoo 2015 q3 i3 Inadequate responders scored lower than typical readers on all six cognitive attributes measured, with corrected p-values below .001. → Cho Eunsoo 2015

Evidence¶

Cho Eunsoo 2015¶

Cho Eunsoo, Roberts Garrett J., Capin Philip, Roberts Greg, Miciak Jeremy, Vaughn Sharon. (2015). Cognitive Attributes, Attention, and Self-Efficacy of Adequate and Inadequate Responders in a Fourth Grade Reading Intervention. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4793275/

q3 · i3 · associational · r2

Planned pairwise contrasts from a MANOVA profile analysis of pretest cognitive measures in a randomized fourth-grade reading intervention study. Inadequate responders differed from adequate responders on "verbal knowledge, t (123) = 5.15, corrected p <.001, and listening comprehension, t (123) = 4.27, corrected p = .001". Hedges' g values from Table 3 show verbal knowledge g = 1.02 and listening comprehension g = .85 for the AR vs. IR contrast.

"Inadequate (IR-C and IR-CW) and adequate responders differed on verbal knowledge, t (123) = 5.15, corrected p <.001, and listening comprehension, t (123) = 4.27, corrected p = .001."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Adequate responders differ from typical readers on verbal knowledge, listening comprehension, working memory, and phonological awareness — related
• Both inadequate responder groups show more teacher-rated attention problems and lower self-reported self-efficacy than typical readers — related
• The multivariate omnibus test shows significant cognitive profile differences across the four reader groups — a broader claim this one bears on
• Phonological awareness and rapid naming differentiate inadequate responders with word reading deficits from those without — related
• Different responsiveness-determination approaches (status vs. slope, criteria, domains, cut points) identify different students as adequate and inadequate responders, with little or no overlap — related