Multilevel analyses across the full sample showed largely similar predictive patterns across orthographies, with RAN's contribution to reading accuracy significantly heterogeneous (p = .008) because RAN was more important in English than in the other languages¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · associational r2–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Multilevel models nesting children within language supported a largely similar predictive pattern across orthographies once the same literacy skills were compared. → Moll 2014 q2 i? For reading accuracy, RAN showed clear heterogeneity between languages (p = .008), with pair-wise comparisons showing the English difference significant for all four other languages. → Moll 2014 (2) q2 i? For spelling, the tendency toward a higher English RAN contribution was not significant in the direct multilevel language comparison. → Moll 2014 (3)

Evidence¶

Moll 2014¶

Moll, K., Ramus, F., Bartling, J., Bruder, J., Kunze, S., Neuhoff, N., Streiftau, S., Lyytinen, H., Leppänen, P. H. T., Lohvansuu, K., Tóth, D., Honbolygó, F., Csépe, V., Bogliotti, C., Iannuzzi, S., Démonet, J.-F., Longeras, E., Valdois, S., George, F., Soares-Boucaud, I., Le Heuzey, M.-F., Billard, C., O'Donovan, M., Hill, G., Williams, J., Brandeis, D., Maurer, U., Schulz, E., van der Mark, S., Müller-Myhsok, B., Schulte-Körne, G., & Landerl, K. (2014). Cognitive mechanisms underlying reading and spelling development in five European orthographies. Learning and Instruction, 29, 65-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.09.003

q2 · i? · associational · r3

Multilevel analyses (R-package lme4) on the whole sample of 1062 children, nesting children within language with age and IQ as covariates, showed the predictive pattern "is to a great extent similar across orthographies once the same literacy skills are compared".

"In sum, the results of the multilevel analyses support our third prediction, that the predictive pattern is to a great extent similar across orthographies once the same literacy skills are compared, with the following exceptions:"

Moll 2014 (2)¶

Moll, K., Ramus, F., Bartling, J., Bruder, J., Kunze, S., Neuhoff, N., Streiftau, S., Lyytinen, H., Leppänen, P. H. T., Lohvansuu, K., Tóth, D., Honbolygó, F., Csépe, V., Bogliotti, C., Iannuzzi, S., Démonet, J.-F., Longeras, E., Valdois, S., George, F., Soares-Boucaud, I., Le Heuzey, M.-F., Billard, C., O'Donovan, M., Hill, G., Williams, J., Brandeis, D., Maurer, U., Schulz, E., van der Mark, S., Müller-Myhsok, B., Schulte-Körne, G., & Landerl, K. (2014). Cognitive mechanisms underlying reading and spelling development in five European orthographies. Learning and Instruction, 29, 65-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.09.003

q2 · i? · associational · r2

In the multilevel models for reading accuracy, RAN showed "clear evidence for heterogeneity between languages (p = .008)"; pair-wise comparisons attributed this to RAN being more important in English, with the difference "significant for all four languages".

"For reading accuracy, RAN showed clear evidence for heterogeneity between languages (p = .008), reflecting that RAN is more important in English than in the other languages. Pair-wise comparisons revealed that this difference was significant for all four languages."

Moll 2014 (3)¶

Moll, K., Ramus, F., Bartling, J., Bruder, J., Kunze, S., Neuhoff, N., Streiftau, S., Lyytinen, H., Leppänen, P. H. T., Lohvansuu, K., Tóth, D., Honbolygó, F., Csépe, V., Bogliotti, C., Iannuzzi, S., Démonet, J.-F., Longeras, E., Valdois, S., George, F., Soares-Boucaud, I., Le Heuzey, M.-F., Billard, C., O'Donovan, M., Hill, G., Williams, J., Brandeis, D., Maurer, U., Schulz, E., van der Mark, S., Müller-Myhsok, B., Schulte-Körne, G., & Landerl, K. (2014). Cognitive mechanisms underlying reading and spelling development in five European orthographies. Learning and Instruction, 29, 65-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.09.003

q2 · i? · associational · r?

For spelling, although the per-language regressions suggested a higher English RAN contribution, the multilevel direct language comparison was not significant; the non-significance was not accompanied by a printed effect size.

"However, this difference was not significant in the direct language comparison based on the multi-level analysis."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Processing Speed — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
• Reading Fluency — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• RAN explained more unique variance in reading speed than phonological measures in English, French, German and Hungarian (16.7 to 22.8%), with Finnish the exception where all proximal factors contributed low, roughly equal amounts — related
• Cognitive predictors explained more spelling variance in English (34.7%) than in the other orthographies (8.9 to 16.2%), and English was the only orthography where RAN made a significant and highest contribution to spelling — related
• Phonological awareness accounted for more unique variance in reading accuracy than RAN in the orthographies studied, while English was the only orthography where RAN added substantial unique variance (14.2%) and total explained variance was highest (39%) — related