Skip to main content

Effects of fluency, oral language, and executive function on reading comprehension performance

Annals of Dyslexia volume 59, pages 34–54 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

Reading disability (RD) typically consists of deficits in word reading accuracy and/or reading comprehension. While it is well known that word reading accuracy deficits lead to comprehension deficits (general reading disability, GRD), less is understood about neuropsychological profiles of children who exhibit adequate word reading accuracy but nevertheless develop specific reading comprehension deficits (S-RCD). Establishing the underlying neuropsychological processes associated with different RD types is essential for ultimately understanding core neurobiological bases of reading comprehension. To this end, the present study investigated isolated and contextual word fluency, oral language, and executive function on reading comprehension performance in 56 9- to 14-year-old children [21 typically developing (TD), 18 GRD, and 17 S-RCD]. Results indicated that TD and S-RCD participants read isolated words at a faster rate than participants with GRD; however, both RD groups had contextual word fluency and oral language weaknesses. Additionally, S-RCD participants showed prominent weaknesses in executive function. Implications for understanding the neuropsychological bases for reading comprehension are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Notes

  1. In such cases when participants showed statistically significant differences in standard deviation between verbal and nonverbal estimates of IQ, the higher score was used; this was true for two participants. Additionally, we included two other participants who earned FSIQ estimates below 80 despite not exhibiting a statistically significant difference between verbal and performance indices; however, in both cases, at least one of their index scores was above 80.

  2. A subset of participants (N = 8) were also tested under NIH grant R01-HD044073 and thus were administered the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fourth Edition (WISC-IV; Wechsler, 2003).

References

  • Aaron, P. G., Joshi, R. M., & Williams, K. A. (1999). Not all reading disabilities are alike. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 120–137. doi:10.1177/002221949903200203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asato, M. R., Sweeney, J. A., & Luna, B. (2006). Cognitive processes in the development of TOL performance. Neuropsychologia, 44, 2259–2269. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.05.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkley, R. (2006). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In D. A. Wolfe, & E. J. Mash (Eds.), Behavioral and emotional disorders in adolescents: Nature, assessment, and treatment (pp. 91–152). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, M. A., & Dennis, M. (1996). The effects of knowledge availability and knowledge accessibility on coherence and elaborative inferencing in children six to fifteen years of age. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 61, 216–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, M. A., Faulkner, H. J., & Dennis, M. (2001). Poor reading comprehension despite fast word decoding in children with hydrocephalus. Brain and Language, 76, 35–44. doi:10.1006/brln.2000.2389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. (1994). Reading and writing acquisition: A developmental neuropsychological perspective. Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next—A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report from Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2006). Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 683–696. doi:10.1348/000709905X67610.

    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(1), 31–42. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catts, H. W., Fey, M. E., Zhang, X., & Tomblin, J. B. (1999). Language basis of reading and reading disabilities: Evidence from a longitudinal investigation. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 331–361. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0304_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P., Adof, S. M., & Barth, A. E. (2003a). The simple view of reading changes over time. Boulder, CO: Society for Scientific Study of Reading.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catts, H., Hogan, T. P., & Fey, M. (2003b). Subgrouping poor readers on the basis of reading-related abilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 151–164. doi:10.1177/002221940303600208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Pazzaglia, F. (1996). Profiles of reading comprehension difficulties: An analysis of single cases. In C. Cornoldi, & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention. (pp. 113–136). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutting, L. E., Eason, S. H., Young, K., & Alberstadt, A. L. (2009). Reading comprehension: cognition and neuroimaging. In K. Pugh, & P. McCardle (Eds.), How children learn to read: current issues and new directions in the integration of cognition, neurobiology and genetics of reading and dyslexia research and practice (p. 329). Philadelphia, PA: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutting, L. E., & Scarborough, H. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 277–299. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test—Third edition (PPVT-III). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • DuPaul, G. J., Power, T. J., Anastopoulos, A. D., & Reid, R. (1998). ADHD rating scale-IV. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. RASE: Remedial & Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. doi:10.1177/074193258600700104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. M., Shaywitz, S. E., Shankweiler, D. P., Katz, L., Liberman, I. Y., Stuebing, K. K., et al. (1994). Cognitive profiles of reading disability: Comparisons of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 6–23. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Francis, D. J., Snow, C. E., August, D., Carlson, C. D., Miller, J., & Iglesias, A. (2006). Measures of reading comprehension: A latent variable analysis of the diagnostic assessment of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 301–322. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., Van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003a). Sources of individual differences in reading comprehension and reading fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 719–729. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., Van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003b). Accuracy and fluency in list and context reading of skilled and RD groups: Absolute and relative performance levels. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 237–245. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, E., Fein, D., Kramer, J., Delis, D., & Morris, R. (1999). WISC-III as a process instrument. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klauda, S. L., & Guthrie, J. T. (2008). Relationships of three components of reading fluency to reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 310–321. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, J. M., Betjemann, R. S., & Olson, R. K. (2008). Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12, 281–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach, J. M., Scarborough, H. S., & Rescorla, L. (2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 211–224. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, G. R. (1995). Toward a definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 45, 3–27. doi:10.1007/BF02648210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahone, E. M., Cirino, P. T., Cutting, L. E., Cerrone, P. M., Hagelthorn, K. M., Hiemenz, J. R., et al. (2002a). Validity of the behavior rating inventory of executive function in children with ADHD and/or Tourette syndrome. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 17(7), 643–662. doi:10.1016/S0887-6177(01)00168-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahone, E. M., Zabel, T. A., Levey, E., Verda, M., & Kinsman, S. (2002b). Parent and self-report ratings of executive function in adolescents with myelomeningocele and hydrocephalus. Child Neuropsychology, 8(4), 258–270. doi:10.1076/chin.8.4.258.13510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangeot, S., Armstrong, K., Colvin, A. N., Yeates, K. O., & Taylor, H. G. (2002). Long-term executive function deficits in children with traumatic brain injuries: Assessment using the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF). Child Neuropsychology, 14, 271–284. doi:10.1076/chin.8.4.271.13503.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCardle, P., Scarborough, H. S., & Cattsm, H. W. (2001). Predicting, explaining, and preventing children’s reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 230–239. doi:10.1111/0938-8982.00023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, K. (2001). Reading and language in children: Exposing hidden deficits. The Psychologist, 14, 238–242.

    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. doi:10.1006/jecp.1999.2498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (1998). Semantic processing and the development of word-recognition skill: Evidence from children with reading comprehension difficulties. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 85–101. doi:10.1006/jmla.1998.2564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (1999). Developmental differences in sensitivity to semantic relations among good readers and poor comprehenders: Evidence from semantic priming. Cognition, 70, B1–B13. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00004-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (2000). Factors influencing syntactic awareness skills in normal readers and poor comprehenders. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 229–241. doi:10.1017/S0142716400002046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).(2003). NAEP 2003 trends in academic progress. Retrieved April 11, 2007 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2004451, (2007).

  • Newcomer, P. L., & Hammill, D. D. (1997). Test of language development—Primary (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakhill, J. (1993). Children’s difficulties in reading comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, 5(3), 223–237. doi:10.1007/BF01323045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakhill, J., & Garnham, A. (1988). Becoming a skilled reader. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakhill, J., & Yuill, N. (1996). Higher order factors in comprehension disability: Processes and remediation (pp. 69–92). Mahwah, New Jersey: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oullette, G. P. (2006). Whats meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word reading and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 554–566. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A., & Hogaboam, T. (1975). Relationship between single word decoding and reading comprehension skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 461–469. doi:10.1037/h0077013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A., Marron, M. A., & Foltz, P. W. (1996). Sources of comprehension failure: Theoretical perspectives and case studies. In C. Cornoldi, & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention (pp. 137–166). Mahwah, New Jersey: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, K. B., & Voeller, K. K. (2004). Prefrontal executive function syndromes in children. Journal of Child Neurology, 19, 785–797.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purvis, K. L., & Tannock, R. (1997). Language abilities in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, reading disabilities, and normal controls. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 25, 133–144. doi:10.1023/A:1025731529006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruffman, T. (1996). Reassessing children's comprehension–monitoring skills. In C. Cornoldi, & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading Comprehension Difficulties: Processes and Intervention (pp. 37–67). Mahwah, New Jersey: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarborough, H. S. (1990). Very early language deficits in dyslexic children. Child Development, 61, 1728–1743. doi:10.2307/1130834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarborough, H. S. (2005). Developmental relationships between language and reading: Reconciling a beautiful hypothesis with some ugly facts. In H. W. Catts, & A. G. Kamhi (Eds.), The connections between language and reading disabilities (pp. 3–24). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalhofer, F., & Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sesma, H. W., Mahone, E. M., Levine, T., Eason, S.H., & Cutting, L.E. (2008). The contribution of executive skills to reading comprehension. Child Neuropsychology, 15, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shallice, T. (1982). Specific impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 298, 199–209. doi:10.1098/rstb.1982.0082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shankweiler, D. (1999). Words to meanings. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 113–127. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0302_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Share, D. L., & Leikin, M. (2004). Language impairment at school entry and later reading disability: Connections at lexical versus supralexical levels of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 8(1), 87–110. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0801_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stothard, S. E., & Hulme, C. (1995). A comparison of phonological skills in children with reading comprehension difficulties and children with decoding difficulties. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 36, 399–408. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1995.tb01298.x.

    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. doi:10.1006/jecp.1998.2477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., & Alexander, J. E. (1997). Cognitive processes as predictors of word recognition and reading comprehension in learning-disabled and skilled readers: Revisiting the specificity hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 128–158. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., & Berninger, V. M. (1996). Individual differences in children’s working memory and writing skill. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 63(2), 358–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., & Trahan, M. (1996). Learning disabled and average readers’ working memory and comprehension: Does metacognition play a role. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 333–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, K. L. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 55–64. doi:10.1207/SLDRP1501_6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Test of word reading efficiency. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torppa, M., Tolvanen, A., Poikkeus, A. M., Eklund, K., Lerkkanen, M. K., Leskinen, E., et al. (2007). Reading development subtypes and their early characteristics. Annals of Dyslexia, 57, 3–32. doi:10.1007/s11881-007-0003-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vellutino, F., Scanlon, D., & Tanzman, M. (1994). Components of reading ability: Issues and problems in operationalizing word identification, phonological coding, and orthographic coding. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues (pp. 279–332). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, D. L. (1991). Wechsler intelligence scale for children—III. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, D. (2003). Wechsler intelligence scale for children—Fourth Edition. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiederholt, L., & Bryant, B. (2000). Examiner’s manual: Gray oral reading test—Fourth Edition. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiig, E., & Secord, W. (1989). Test of language competence—Expanded. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willcutt, E. G., Doyle, A. E., Nigg, J. T., Faraone, S. V., & Pennington, B. F. (2005). Validity of the executive function theory of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analytic review. Biological Psychiatry, 57, 1336–1346. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.02.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, M., & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 211–238. doi:10.1207/S1532799XSSR0503_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the Mental Wellness Foundation, the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine General Clinical Research Center (NIH grant M01-RR00052), and NIH R01-HD044073. The authors thank Sarah Eason for her assistance with data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Laurie E. Cutting, Carolyn A. S. Cole, Terry M. Levine & E. Mark Mahone

  2. Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Laurie E. Cutting

  3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Carolyn A. S. Cole & E. Mark Mahone

  4. Johns Hopkins University School of Education, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Laurie E. Cutting

  5. Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT, USA

    Laurie E. Cutting

  6. Loyola College, Baltimore, MD, USA

    April Materek

Authors
  1. Laurie E. Cutting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. April Materek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carolyn A. S. Cole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Terry M. Levine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. E. Mark Mahone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laurie E. Cutting.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cutting, L.E., Materek, A., Cole, C.A.S. et al. Effects of fluency, oral language, and executive function on reading comprehension performance. Ann. of Dyslexia 59, 34–54 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-009-0022-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-009-0022-0

Keywords

  • Executive function
  • Fluency
  • Oral language
  • Reading comprehension
  • Reading disabilities