2008Journal of Research in ReadingRequires access

Comparing the contribution of two tests of working memory to reading in relation to phonological awareness and rapid naming speed

George Kyriacou Georgiou, Jagannath Prasad Das, Denyse V. Hayward

Open publisher page 71 citations

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the contribution of two different versions of working memory to word reading and reading comprehension in relation to phonological awareness and rapid naming speed. Fifty children were administered two measures of working memory, namely an adaptation of the Daneman and Carpenter sentence span task and Sentence Question, tests of phonological awareness, rapid naming speed, word reading and reading comprehension. The results indicated that Sentence Question accounted for unique variance over and beyond the effects of Daneman and Carpenter's sentence span task, whereas the latter did not when the effects of Sentence Question were partialled out. In addition, both phonological awareness and rapid naming were accounting for unique variance beyond the effects of working memory in predicting reading. The role of working memory on reading is discussed, and future directions for research are suggested.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The purpose of this study was to compare the contribution of two different versions of working memory to word reading and reading comprehension in relation to phonological awareness and rapid naming speed. Fifty children were administered two measures of working memory, namely an adaptation of the Daneman and Carpenter sentence span task and Sentence Question, tests of phonological awareness, rapid naming speed, word reading and reading comprehension. The results indicated that Sentence Question accounted for unique variance over and beyond the effects of Daneman and Carpenter's sentence span task, whereas the latter did not when the effects of Sentence Question were partialled out. In addition, both phonological awareness and rapid naming were accounting for unique variance beyond the effects of working memory in predicting reading. The role of working memory on reading is discussed, and future directions for research are suggested.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 71 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the contribution of two different versions of working memory to word reading and reading comprehension in relation to phonological awareness and rapid naming speed. Fifty children were administered two measures of working memory, namely an adaptation of the Daneman and Carpenter sentence span task and Sentence Question, tests of phonological awareness, rapid naming speed, word reading and reading comprehension. The results indicated that Sentence Question accounted for unique variance over and beyond the effects of Daneman and Carpenter's sentence span task, whereas the latter did not when the effects of Sentence Question were partialled out. In addition, both phonological awareness and rapid naming were accounting for unique variance beyond the effects of working memory in predicting reading. The role of working memory on reading is discussed, and future directions for research are suggested.

Key concepts: Working memory, Sentence, Psychology, Reading (process), Cognitive psychology, Phonological awareness, Reading comprehension, Comprehension

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparing the contribution of two tests of working memory to reading in relation to phonological awareness and rapid naming speed — Research Paper | ScholarLens