2023DyslexiaRequires access

Challenging the stability of RAN development: Acknowledging PA and Gf in relation to reading

Ulrika Wolff, Malena Åvall, Jan‐Eric Gustafsson

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

This study had two overriding goals, (1) examine the stability of rapid automatized naming (RAN) in predicting reading achievement while taking into account two other frequently studied constructs, phonological awareness and fluid intelligence (Gf) and (2) examine the predictive power of RAN measured at age 4 on reading ability. The stable pattern of RAN development found in a previously reported growth model was challenged by relating phonological awareness and Gf to the model. Children (N = 364) were followed from age 4 to age 10. At age 4, Gf related strongly to phonological awareness, which in turn related strongly to RAN. The relations between the RAN measures over time was largely unaffected by the inclusion of Gf and phonological awareness. RAN, Gf and phonological awareness at age 4 independently predicted latent factors reflecting reading-related abilities in grade 1 and grade 4. However, when scrutinizing type of reading measure in grade 4, Gf, phonological awareness and RAN at age 4 predicted both spelling and reading fluency, whereas RAN in grade 2 did not predict spelling but was the strongest predictor of reading fluency.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This study had two overriding goals, (1) examine the stability of rapid automatized naming (RAN) in predicting reading achievement while taking into account two other frequently studied constructs, phonological awareness and fluid intelligence (Gf) and (2) examine the predictive power of RAN measured at age 4 on reading ability. The stable pattern of RAN development found in a previously reported growth model was challenged by relating phonological awareness and Gf to the model. Children (N = 364) were followed from age 4 to age 10. At age 4, Gf related strongly to phonological awareness, which in turn related strongly to RAN. The relations between the RAN measures over time was largely unaffected by the inclusion of Gf and phonological awareness. RAN, Gf and phonological awareness at age 4 independently predicted latent factors reflecting reading-related abilities in grade 1 and grade 4. However, when scrutinizing type of reading measure in grade 4, Gf, phonological awareness and RAN at age 4 predicted both spelling and reading fluency, whereas RAN in grade 2 did not predict spelling but was the strongest predictor of reading fluency.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 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

This study had two overriding goals, (1) examine the stability of rapid automatized naming (RAN) in predicting reading achievement while taking into account two other frequently studied constructs, phonological awareness and fluid intelligence (Gf) and (2) examine the predictive power of RAN measured at age 4 on reading ability. The stable pattern of RAN development found in a previously reported growth model was challenged by relating phonological awareness and Gf to the model. Children (N = 364) were followed from age 4 to age 10. At age 4, Gf related strongly to phonological awareness, which in turn related strongly to RAN. The relations between the RAN measures over time was largely unaffected by the inclusion of Gf and phonological awareness. RAN, Gf and phonological awareness at age 4 independently predicted latent factors reflecting reading-related abilities in grade 1 and grade 4. However, when scrutinizing type of reading measure in grade 4, Gf, phonological awareness and RAN at age 4 predicted both spelling and reading fluency, whereas RAN in grade 2 did not predict spelling but was the strongest predictor of reading fluency.

Key concepts: Rapid automatized naming, Phonological awareness, Ran, Fluency, Psychology, Reading (process), Spelling, Phonemic awareness

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Challenging the stability of RAN development: Acknowledging PA and Gf in relation to reading — Research Paper | ScholarLens