Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Executive Functions in Reading Comprehension

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Educational Psychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Our goal in this paper is to understand the extent to which, and under what conditions, executive functions (EFs) play a role in reading comprehension processes. We begin with a brief review of core components of EF (inhibition, shifting, and updating) and reading comprehension. We then discuss the status of EFs in process models of reading comprehension. Next, we review and synthesize empirical evidence in the extant literature for the involvement of core components of EF in reading comprehension processes under different reading conditions and across different populations. In conclusion, we propose that EFs may help explain complex interactions between the reader, the text, and the discourse situation, and call for both existing and future models of reading comprehension to include EFs as explicit components.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In this review, we focus only on this set of models (i.e., process models) as they are pertinent to the role of EF. It is important to note that a second set of models in the literature focuses on the identification of component skills (i.e., component models), linguistic and cognitive, that explain reading comprehension performance (Barnes 2015). These models are not reviewed because they fall outside the scope of this paper.

References

*Indicates an article that was derived from our systematic literature database searches.

  • *Aboud, K., Bailey, S., Petrill, S., & Cutting, L. E. (2016). Comprehending text versus reading words in young readers with varying reading ability: distinct patterns of functional connectivity from common processing hubs. Developmental Science, 632–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12422.

  • Albrecht, J. E., & O’Brien, E. J. (1993). Updating a mental model: maintaining both local and global coherence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1061–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.5.1061.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Altemeier, L. E., Abbott, R. D., & Berninger, V. W. (2008). Executive functions for reading and writing in typical literacy development and dyslexia. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 30, 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390701562818.

  • August, D., Francis, D. J., Hsu, H. A., & Snow, C. E. (2006). Assessing reading comprehension in bilinguals. The Elementary School Journal, 107(2), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.1086/510656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. (1996). Exploring the central executive. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 49, 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. D. (1998). Random generation and the executive control of working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51(A), 819–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 829–839. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60452-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, M.A. (2015). What do models of reading comprehension and its development have to contribute to a science of comprehension practice and assessment for adolescent students? In K. Santi and D. Reed (Eds.), Improving comprehension for middle and high school students (pp. 1–18). New York: Springer.

  • Best, J. R., Miller, P. H., & Jones, L. L. (2009). Executive functions after age 5: changes and correlates. Developmental Review, 29, 180–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.05.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (1992). Cognitive mechanisms in children’s gender stereotyping: Theoretical and educational implications of a cognitive-based intervention. Child Development, 63, 1351–1363.

  • Blair, C., Zelazo, P. D., & Greenberg, M. T. (2005). The measurement of executive function in early childhood. Developmental Neuropsychology, 28, 561–571. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2802_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohn-Gettler, C., Rapp, D., van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & White, M. (2011). Adult’s and children’s monitoring of story events in the service of comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 39, 992–1011. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0085-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Borella, E., Carretti, B., & Pelegrina, S. (2010). The specific role of inhibition in reading comprehension in good and poor comprehenders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(6), 541–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219410371676.

  • Budd, D., Whitney, P., & Turley, K. J. (1995). Individual differences in working memory strategies for reading expository text. Memory & Cognition, 23, 735–748. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, P. W., & Shallice, T. (1996). Bizarre responses, rule detection and frontal lobe lesions. Cortex, 32(2), 241–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfuss, R., & Kendeou, P. (2016). The role of executive function in knowledge revision. Paper presented at the Society of Text and Discourse Annual Conference, Kassel, Germany.

  • Cain, K. (2006). Individual differences in children’s memory and reading comprehension: an investigation of semantic and inhibitory deficits. Memory, 14(5), 553–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210600624481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, S. M., & Moses, L. J. (2001). Individual differences in inhibitory control and children’s theory of mind. Child Development, 72, 1032–1053. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Carretti, B., Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Palladino, P. (2004). What happens to information to be suppressed in working‐memory tasks? Short and long term effects. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57(6), 1059–1084. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000684.

  • *Carretti, B., Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Romanò, M. (2005). Updating in working memory: a comparison of good and poor comprehenders. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 91, 45–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2005.01.005.

  • Carretti, B., Borella, E., & Beni, D. (2007). Does a strategic memory training improve the working memory performance of younger and older adults? Experimental Psychology, 54, 311–320.

  • *Carretti, B., Borella, E., Cornoldi, C., & De Beni, R. (2009). Role of working memory in explaining the performance of individuals with specific reading comprehension difficulties: a meta-analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 246–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.10.002.

  • *Cartoceti, R., Sampedro, B., Abusamra, V., & Ferreres, A. (2009). Evaluacion de la iniciación y supresión de respuesta verbal en niños. Revista Fonoaudiologica, 52(2), 9–24.

  • Cartwright, K. B. (2002). Cognitive development and reading: The relation of reading-specific multiple classification skill to reading comprehension in elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 56–63.

  • *Cartwright, K. B. (2006). Fostering flexibility and comprehension in elementary students. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 628–634. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.59.7.2.

  • *Cartwright, K. B. (2007). The contribution of graphophonological-semantic flexibility to reading comprehension in college students: implications for a less simple view of reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 39, 173–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862960701331902.

  • *Cartwright, K. B. (2008). Cognitive flexibility and reading comprehension. In C.C. Block & S. R. Parris (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 50–64). New York: Guilford.

  • *Cartwright, K. B. (2015). Executive function and reading comprehension: the critical role of cognitive flexibility. In S. R. Parris & K. Headley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (3rd ed., pp. 56–71). New York: Guilford.

  • *Cartwright, K., Hodgekiss, M. D., & Isaac, M. C. (2008). Graphophonological-semantic flexibility: contributions to skilled reading across the lifespan. In K. B. Cartwright (Ed.), Literacy processes: Cognitive flexibility in learning and teaching. New York: Guilford.

  • *Cartwright, K. B., Marshall, T. R., Dandy, K. L., & Isaac, M. C. (2010). The development of graphophonological-semantic cognitive flexibility and its contribution to reading comprehension in beginning readers. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11(1), 61–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248370903453584.

  • *Chiappe, P., Siegel, L. S., & Hasher, L. (2000). Working memory, inhibitory control, and reading disability. Memory & Cognition, 28(1), 8–17. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211570.

  • *Christopher, M. E., Miyake, A., Keenan, J. M., Pennington, B., DeFries, J. C., Wadsworth, S. J., ... & Olson, R. K. (2012). Predicting word reading and comprehension with executive function and speed measures across development: a latent variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(3), 470–488. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027375.

  • Cohen, J. D., Perlstein, W. M., Braver, T. S., Nystrom, L. E., Noll, D. C., Jonides, J., & Smith, E. E. (1997). Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task. Nature, 386(6625), 604–608. https://doi.org/10.1038/386604a0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, S. L., Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1991). Age and reading: the impact of distraction. Psychology and Aging, 6, 533–541. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.6.4.533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Conners, F. A. (2009). Attentional control and the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 22(5), 591–613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-008-9126-x.

  • *Cutting, L. E., Materek, A., Cole, C. A., Levine, T. M., & Mahone, E. M. (2009). Effects of fluency, oral language, and executive function on reading comprehension performance. Annals of Dyslexia, 59, 34–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-009-0022-0.

  • *Cutting, L.E., Bailey, S.K., Barquero, L.A., & Aboud, K. (2015). Neurobiological bases of word recognition and reading comprehension. In C.M. Connor & P. McCardle (Eds.), Advances in reading intervention: Research to practice to research (pp. 73–84). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.

  • *Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6.

  • Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9(4), 561–584. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.9.4.561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: a meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(4), 422–433. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Das, J. P., Naglieri, J. A., & Kirby, J. R. (1994). Assessment of cognitive processes: the PASS theory of intelligence. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davelaar, E. J., Goshen-Gottstein, Y., Ashkenazi, A., Haarmann, H. J., & Usher, M. (2005). The demise of short-term memory revisited: empirical and computational investigations of recency effects. Psychological Review, 112, 3–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, M. C., Amso, D., Anderson, L. C., & Diamond, A. (2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia, 44(11), 2037–2078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.02.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *De Beni, R., & Palladino, P. (2000). Intrusion errors in working memory tasks: are they related to reading comprehension ability? Learning and Individual Differences, 12, 131–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1041-6080(01)00033-4.

  • *Demagistri, M. S., Richards, M. M., & Juric, L. C. (2014). Incidencia del funcionamiento ejecutivo en el rendimiento en comprensión lectora en behaviorits. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 12(33), 1–27.

  • Denckla, M. B., & Rudel, R. G. (1976). Rapid ‘automatized’ naming (R.A.N.): Dyslexia differentiated from other learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 14(4), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(76)90075-0.

  • Denckla, M. B. (1996). A theory and model of executive function: a neuropsychological perspective. In G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 263–278). Baltimore: Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Eason, S. H., Goldberg, L. F., Young, K. M., Geist, M. C., & Cutting, L. E. (2012). Reader–text interactions: how differential text and question types influence cognitive skills needed for reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 515–528. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027182.

  • Fisk, J. E., & Sharp, C. A. (2004). Age-related impairment in executive functioning: updating, inhibition, shifting, and access. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 26(7), 874–890. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390490510680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2004). The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: a latent-variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(1), 101–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Fuhs, M. W., Nesbitt, K. T., Farran, D. C., & Dong, N. (2014). Longitudinal associations between executive functioning and academic skills across content areas. Developmental psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036633.

  • *García-Madruga, J. A., Vila, J. O., Gómez-Veiga, I., Duque, G., & Elosúa, M. R. (2014). Executive processes, reading comprehension and academic achievement in 3th grade primary students. Learning and individual differences, 35, 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.07.013.

  • Garon, N., Bryson, S. E., & Smith, I. M. (2008). Executive function in preschoolers: a review using an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 31–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Georgiou, G. K., & Das, J. P. (2016). What component of executive functions contributes to normal and impaired reading comprehension in young adults? Research in Developmental Disabilities, 49, 118–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.12.001.

  • Gernsbacher, M. A. (1991). Cognitive processes and mechanisms in language comprehension: the structure building framework. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 217–263). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Gernsbacher, M. A., & Faust, M. E. (1991). The mechanism of suppression: a component of general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.17.2.245.

  • *Gernsbacher, M. A., Varner, K. R., & Faust, M. E. (1990). Investigating differences in general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.16.3.430.

  • Gerstadt, C. L., Hong, Y. J., & Diamond, A. (1994). The relationship between cognition and action: Performance of children 2–7 years old on a Stroop-like day-night test. Cognition, 53, 129–153.

  • Goldman, S. R., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2015). Research on learning and instruction: implications for curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215601866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, M. (1983). The Gordon diagnostic system. DeWitt: Gordon Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C. (2007). An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: theories, interventions, and technologies. New York: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C. (2015). Deeper learning with advances in discourse science and technology. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2(1), 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215600888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, D. A., & Berg, E. A. (1948). A behavioral analysis of degree of reinforcement and ease of shifting to new responses in a Weigl-type card-sorting problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 404–411.

  • *Guajardo, N. R., & Cartwright, K. B. (2016). The contribution of theory of mind, counterfactual reasoning, and executive function to pre-readers’ language comprehension and later reading awareness and comprehension in elementary school. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 144, 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.11.004.

  • Hallet, P. E. (1978). Primary and secondary saccades to goals defined by instructions. Vision Research, 18(10), 1279–1296.

  • Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2001). A new tool for measuring and understanding individual differences in the component processes of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 103–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasher, L., Zacks, R. T., & May, C. P. (1999). Inhibitory control, circadian arousal, and age. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.), Attention and performance. Attention and performance XVII: cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application (pp. 653–675). Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huizinga, M., Dolan, C. V., & van der Molen, M. W. (2006). Age-related change in executive function: developmental trends and a latent variable analysis. Neuropsychologia, 44(11), 2017–2036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.01.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Injoque-Ricle, I., Calero, A. D., Alloway, T. P., & Burín, D. I. (2011). Assesing working memory in Spanish-speaking children: automated working memory assessment battery adaptation. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 78–84. https://doi.org/10.5872/psiencia/7.3.22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonides, J., & Nee, D. E. (2006). Brain mechanisms of proactive interference in working memory. Neuroscience, 139(1), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.06.042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99(1), 122–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, M. J., Conway, A. R., Miura, T. K., & Colflesh, G. J. (2007). Working memory, attention control, and the Nback task: a question of construct validity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 615–622 https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.615.

  • Kane, M. J., Meier, M. E., Smeekens, B. A., Gross, G. M., Chun, C. A., Silvia, P. J., & Kwapil, T. R. (2016). Individual differences in the executive control of attention, memory, and thought, and their associations with schizotypy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(8), 1017–1048. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2017). Theories of text processing: a view from the top-down. In M. Schober, D. N. Rapp, & M. A. Britt (Eds.), Handbook of discourse processes (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2005). The effects of readers’ misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., *Smith, E. R., & O’Brien, E. J. (2013). Updating during reading comprehension: why causality matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 39, 854–865. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029468.

  • Kendeou, P., Walsh, E., Smith, E. R., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). Knowledge revision processes in refutation texts. Discourse Processes, 51, 374–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2014.913961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., Papadopoulos, T. C., & Spanoudis, G. (2015). Reading comprehension and PASS theory. In T. C. Papadopoulos, R. Parrila, & J. R. Kirby (Eds.), Cognition, intelligence, and achievement (pp. 117–136).

  • Kendeou, P., McMaster, K. L., & Christ, T. J. (2016). Reading comprehension: core components and processes. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215624707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kieffer, M. J., Vukovic, R. K., & Berry, D. (2013). Roles of attention shifting and inhibitory control in fourth-grade reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(4), 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.54.

  • Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998) Comprehension: a paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kongs, S. K., Thompson, L. L., Iverson, G. L., & Heaton, R. K. (2000). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test-64 card version: professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korkman, M., Kirk, U., & Kemp, S. (2007). NEPSY II. Clinical and interpretative manual. San Antonio: Psychological Corp.

  • Larson, G. E., Merritt, C. R., & Williams, S. E. (1988). Information processing and intelligence: some implications of task complexity. Intelligence, 12(2), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-2896(88)90012-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehto, J. E., Juujärvi, P., Kooistra, L., & Pulkkinen, L. (2003). Dimensions of executive functioning: evidence from children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21(1), 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151003321164627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Locascio, G., Mahone, E. M., Eason, S., & Cutting, L. (2010). Executive dysfunction among children with reading comprehension deficits. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409355476.

  • Logan, G. D. (1994). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: a user’s guide to the stop signal paradigm. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.), Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp. 189–239). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacGinitie, W. H., MacGinitie, R. K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2000). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests (fourth ed.). Itasica: Riverside Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1985). Distributed memory and the representation of general and specific information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114(2), 159–188. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.114.2.159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLean, J. F., & Hitch, G. J. (1999). Working memory impairments in children with specific arithmetic learning difficulties. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 74(3), 240–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 51, 297–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51009-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., Jacovina, M. E., & Allen, L. K. (2015). Higher order thinking in comprehension. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of individual differences in reading: text and context (pp. 164–176). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McVay, J. C., & Kane, M. J. (2009). Conducting the train of thought: Working memory capacity, goal neglect, and mind wandering in an executive-control task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 196–204 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014104.

  • McVay, J. C., & Kane, M. J. (2012). Why does working memory capacity predict variation in reading comprehension? On the influence of mind wandering and executive attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(2), 302–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411429458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monsell, S. (1996). Control of mental processes. In V. Bruce (Ed.), Unsolved mysteries of the mind: tutorial essays in cognition (pp. 93–148). Hove: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, N., & Jones, D. M. (1990). Memory updating in working memory: the role of the central executive. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 111–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1990.tb02349.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Muijselaar, M. M., & de Jong, P. F. (2015). The effects of updating ability and knowledge of reading strategies on reading comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 43, 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.011.

  • Myers, J. L., & O’Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Processes, 26, 131–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539809545042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, K., Adams, J. W., Bowyer-Crane, C. A., & Snowling, M. J. (1999). Working memory deficits in poor comprehenders reflect underlying language impairments. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 73, 139–158.

  • Navon, D. (1977). Forest before trees: the precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 353–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nigg, J. T. (2000). On inhibition/disinhibition in developmental psychopathology: views from cognitive and personality psychology and a working inhibition taxonomy. Psychological Bulletin, 126(2), 220–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. A., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: willed and automatic control of behavior. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation: advances in research and theory (Vol. 4, pp. 1–18). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Nouwens, S., Groen, M. A., & Verhoeven, L. (2016). How storage and executive functions contribute to children’s reading comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.12.008.

  • *O’Brien, E. J., Albrecht, J. E., Hakala, C. M., & Rizzella, M. L. (1995). Activation and suppression of antecedents during reinstatement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(3), 626–634.

  • *Palladino, P., Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Pazzaglia, F. (2001). Working memory and updating processes in reading comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 29, 344–354. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194929.

  • *Pelegrina, S., Capodieci, A., Carretti, B., & Cornoldi, C. (2014). Magnitude representation and working memory updating in children with arithmetic and reading comprehension disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 658–668. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219414527480.

  • Pennington, B. F. (1997). Dimensions of executive functions in normal and abnormal development. In G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Development of the prefrontal cortex: evolution, neurobiology, and behavior (pp. 265–281). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, S. J., & Gathercole, S. E. (2001). The Working Memory Test Battery for Children. London: The Psychological Corporation.

  • *Pimperton, H., & Nation, K. (2010). Suppressing irrelevant information from working memory: evidence for domain-specific deficits in poor comprehenders. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(4), 380–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.02.005.

  • *Potocki, A., Sanchez, M., Ecalle, J., & Magnan, A. (2017). Linguistic and cognitive profiles of 8-to 15-year-old children with specific reading comprehension difficulties: the role of executive functions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(2), 128–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219415613080.

  • Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: the nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Radvansky, G. A., & Copeland, D. E. (2001). Working memory and situation model updating. Memory & Cognition, 29, 1073–1080. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206375.

  • Rapp, D. N. (2016). The consequences of reading inaccurate information. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(4), 281–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416649347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redick, T. S., & Lindsey, D. R. (2013). Complex span and n-back measures of working memory: a meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(6), 1102–1113. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0453-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reitan, R. M., & Wolfson, D. (1993). The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery: Theory and clinical interpretation (2nd ed.). Tucson: Neuropsychology Press.

  • Roberts, R. J., Hager, L. D., & Heron, C. (1994). Prefrontal cognitive processes: working memory and inhibition in the antisaccade task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 374–393. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.123.4.374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(2), 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Savage, R., Cornish, K., Manly, T., & Hollis, C. (2006). Cognitive processes in children’s reading and attention: the role of working memory, divided attention, and response inhibition. British Journal of Psychology, 97(3), 365–385. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712605X81370.

  • Schmiedek, F., Hildebrandt, A., Lövdén, M., Wilhelm, O., & Lindenberger, U. (2009). Complex span versus updating tasks of working memory: the gap is not that deep. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(4), 1089–1096. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015730.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Sesma, H. W., Mahone, E. M., Levine, T., Eason, S. H., & Cutting, L. E. (2009). The contribution of executive skills to reading comprehension. Child Neuropsychology, 15(3), 232–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297040802220029.

  • Spector, A., & Biederman, I. (1976). Mental set and mental shift revisited. The American Journal of Psychology, 669–679. https://doi.org/10.2307/1421465.

  • Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643–662. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Swanson, H. L. (1999). Reading comprehension and working memory in learning-disabled readers: is the phonological loop more important than the executive system? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1998.2477.

  • Swanson, H. L., Howard, C. B., & Saez, L. (2006). Do different components of working memory underlie different subgroups of reading disabilities? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(3), 252–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390030501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trabasso, T., Van den Broek, P., & Suh, S. Y. (1989). Logical necessity and transitivity of causal relations in stories. Discourse Processes, 12(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538909544717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 127–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90040-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., Young, M., Tzeng, Y., & Linderholm, T. (1999). The landscape model of reading. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 71–98). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Van der Sluis, S., de Jong, P. F., & van der Leij, A. (2004). Inhibition and shifting in children with learning deficits in arithmetic and reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87(3), 239–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2003.12.002.

  • *van der Sluis, S., de Jong, P. F., & van der Leij, A. (2007). Executive functioning in children, and its relations with reasoning, reading, and arithmetic. Intelligence, 35(5), 427–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.09.001.

  • *Waters, G. S. (1996). The measurement of verbal working memory capacity and its relation to reading comprehension. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 49(1), 51–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755607.

  • Wiebe, S. A., Espy, K. A., & Charak, D. (2008). Using confirmatory factor analysis to understand executive control in preschool children: I. Latent structure. Developmental Psychology, 44(2), 575–587. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.2.575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiederholt, J. L., & Bryant, B. R. (2001). Gray oral reading tests—Fourth Edition. Austin: PRO-ED.

  • Woodcock, R. W. (1998). Woodcock reading mastery tests—revised/normative update. Circle Pines: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (1999). Woodcock–Johnson III tests of achievement (Research ed.). Itasca: Riverside.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock–Johnson III tests of achievement. Itasca: Riverside.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Yeniad, N., Malda, M., Mesman, J., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Pieper, S. (2013). Shifting ability predicts math and reading performance in children: a meta-analytical study. Learning and Individual Differences, 23, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.10.004.

  • Yin, S., & Peng, H. (2016). The role of inhibition in age-related off-topic verbosity: not access but deletion and restraint functions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00544.

  • Yntema, D. B. (1963). Keeping track of several things at once. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 5(1), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872086300500102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelazo, P. D., & Frye, D. (1998). Cognitive complexity and control: II. The development of executive function in childhood. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(4), 121–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10774761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelazo, P. D., Blair, C. B., & Willoughby, M. T. (2016). Executive function: implications for education (NCER 2017–2000) Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

  • Zwaan, R. A., Langston, M. C., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: an event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6, 292–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00513.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Writing of this paper was supported by grant R324A160064 from the US Department of Education to the University of Minnesota. The opinions are those of the authors and do not represent the policies of the US Department of Education.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, 56 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA

    Reese Butterfuss & Panayiota Kendeou

Authors
  1. Reese Butterfuss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Panayiota Kendeou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reese Butterfuss.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Butterfuss, R., Kendeou, P. The Role of Executive Functions in Reading Comprehension. Educ Psychol Rev 30, 801–826 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9422-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9422-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation