In this longitudinal investigation, the development of word-retrieval speed and its relationship to reading was studied in 72 average and 11 severely impaired readers in the kindergarten to grade 2 period (5-8 years). Subjects received a battery of 3 reading measures and 4 continuous naming tests with varied stimulus requirements. Results indicated that the relationship of retrieval speed to reading is a function of development and the correspondence between higher- and lower-level processes in the specific retrieval and reading measures. As automaticity in retrieval developed in average readers, naming-speed/reading relationships moved from strong, general predictions to highly differentiated ones. The strongest correlations were between naming speed for graphological stimuli and lower-level reading tasks. Impaired readers performed slower than average readers on all naming measures across all years, particularly on graphological symbols. 3 dyslexic subgroups emerged: the largest was globally impaired across all naming rate and reading tasks; 2 smaller subgroups had early specific, retrieval-rate deficits and dissociated reading deficits.

In this longitudinal investigation, the development of word-retrieval speed and its relationship to reading was studied in 72 average and 11 severely impaired readers in the kindergarten to grade 2 period (5-8 years). Subjects received a battery of 3 reading measures and 4 continuous naming tests with varied stimulus requirements. Results indicated that the relationship of retrieval speed to reading is a function of development and the correspondence between higher- and lower-level processes in the specific retrieval and reading measures. As automaticity in retrieval developed in average readers, naming-speed/reading relationships moved from strong, general predictions to highly differentiated ones. The strongest correlations were between naming speed for graphological stimuli and lower-level reading tasks. Impaired readers performed slower than average readers on all naming measures across all years, particularly on graphological symbols. 3 dyslexic subgroups emerged: the largest was globally impaired across all naming rate and reading tasks; 2 smaller subgroups had early specific, retrieval-rate deficits and dissociated reading deficits.