The aim of this research was to compare the effectiveness of the three receptive language modes of oral reading, silent reading and listening, for comprehension of short pieces of text. Thirty-six children were used in the study, aged between 7:06 and 8:06 years old. Three parallel passages at two levels of the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (NARA) were used as texts. The order of presentation of each mode, and the particular text used for each mode, were both varied as part of the design. A complex Analysis of Variance design was used, incorporating the following independent variables: (a) Reading Attainment of children; (b) Sex of children; (c) Order of presentation of text; (d) Mode of presentation of text; (e) Form of text. The dependent variable was NARA comprehension scores. Interaction effects were noted between certain combinations of the Independent Variables of Attainment, Sex, Form and Order. The Level 1 reading task did not discriminate effectively between the different attainment groups. As a consequence of this, the attitude of certain groups of children to the task seemed to affect their performance more than did their level of attainment. At both Levels 1 and 2 of the NARA the results demonstrated significant differences between the mode groups, with the silent reading group performing more poorly than either the oral reading or listening groups. This was thought to be because: (a) The subjects were free to establish meaning whilst listening, and this assisted comprehension. (b) The subjects' act of verbalization in the oral reading mode, helped to establish meaning.

Does scotopic sensitivity correction enhance parsing and, thus, comprehension? Twenty-two readers with scotopic sensitivity (mean age = 20.3 yrs.; 40.9% male) parsed sentences under scotopic correction and control conditions. Measures included eye-movement indices of parsing and comprehension questions. Although eye movements suggested enhanced parsing, comprehension scores were not significantly improved with correction.

Purposes of the present study included describing a variety of error recovery patterns based on eye movement (EM) measures of sentence parsing across reading level and error type. A qualitative pattern analysis of EM mappings was completed for students with reading disabilities (n = 10) and nondisabled students (n = 10) who were parsing control and erred sentences. Independent variables included error type (syntactically ambiguous, semantically anomalous, and control sentences) and reading proficiency level. Dependent variables consisted of seven eye movement measures. Chi-square analyses were performed to examine group differences across frequencies per pattern. Results suggest that the error recovery strategies deployed by both groups were similar in pattern and frequency; patterns were largely organized, strategic, and efficient, as predicted. Evidence for seven newly defined strategies was found, with indications of multiple strategies within sentences by both groups. Strategies tended to be error "reanalysis" (vs. "recovery") heuristics, in that readers from both groups used regressions to reanalyze regions of inconsistency rather than regions of disambiguation. Earlier conclusions regarding disorganized processing and individual differences among adolescents with reading disabilities are discussed.

The purpose of these two studies was to examine the rhythmical patterns displayed by subjects with and without reading disabilities while they were reading (Study 1), and to vary rhythmicity through priming and observe the effects on parsing ability using eye-movement and comprehension measures (Study 2). Rhythmicity during silent reading was operationalized by transcribing eye-movement measures into pitch, rhythm, and rests. In Study 1, 17 subjects with reading disabilities and 15 control subjects (M age = 15, male = 60%) parsed 20 flawed and control sentences. In Study 2, 35 control subjects (M age = 21, male = 43%) parsed 9 phrases from familiar songs under one of three rhythm-priming conditions. Results (Study 1) indicated significant differences in rhythm patterns. Subjects with reading disabilities exhibited rhythm variability, unpredictability, and lethargic tempos. In Study 2, significant differences across priming conditions were found, with primed subjects exhibiting improved parsing and comprehension. Rhythm may be an organizational substrate for syntax.

No abstract