Claims

Visual processing showed no correlation with reading or writing in third-grade students

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? There was no correlation between visual processing and reading or writing. → Mendes 2017

Evidence

Mendes 2017

Mendes, G. G., & Barrera, S. D. (2017). Phonological Processing and Reading and Writing Skills in Literacy. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto), 27(68), 298-305. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-43272768201707

q2 · i? · associational · r1

In the same 50-student correlational study, the article states "there was no correlation between visual processing and reading or writing"; no effect size or test statistic is printed in the available text.

"there was no correlation between visual processing and reading or writing"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id visual-processing-no-correlation-reading-writing
title Visual processing showed no correlation with reading or writing in third-grade students
description Visual processing showed no correlation with reading or writing in third-grade students
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2017
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — mendes-2017

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.