The multivariate omnibus test shows significant cognitive profile differences across the four reader groups¶

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 · overdue for a recheck since 2020: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 MANOVA revealed statistically significant differences in cognitive attribute profiles across typical readers, adequate responders, and the two inadequate responder groups. → 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

MANOVA profile analysis across six cognitive attributes (working memory, nonverbal reasoning, verbal knowledge, listening comprehension, phonological awareness, rapid naming) for the four reader groups. The omnibus test showed "statistically significant differences in cognitive attributes across the groups, F (21, 442) = 9.89, Wilk's Λ = 0.384, partial η2 = .273". A significant shape effect (F (18, 441) = 3.984, partial η2 = .132) confirmed profiles differed in pattern, not just level.

"We found statistically significant differences in cognitive attributes across the groups, F (21, 442) = 9.89, Wilk's Λ = 0.384, partial η2 = .273. The multivariate effect size was estimated at .54, indicating 54% of the variance in the first canonical variate was accounted for by group membership."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Adequate responders differ from typical readers on verbal knowledge, listening comprehension, working memory, and phonological awareness — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Both inadequate responder groups show more teacher-rated attention problems and lower self-reported self-efficacy than typical readers — related
• Inadequate responders to fourth-grade reading intervention show lower verbal knowledge and listening comprehension than adequate responders and typical readers — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Inadequate responders were more likely to have identified disabilities and limited English proficiency than adequate responders or typical readers — related
• Phonological awareness and rapid naming differentiate inadequate responders with word reading deficits from those without — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Multivariate analysis confirmed a significant overall group effect, and all outcome variables correlated positively in both groups — 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
• Students with reading difficulties were more likely assigned to the Attention Control profile, while typically developing students were more likely assigned to the Decoding/Cognitive profile — related