Ailion, Alyssa

King, Tricia Z., PhD.

Shin, Luke

English

Georgia State University

Past research on children indicates that digit span (DS) predicts reading ability, even more so 
than intelligence measures (Alloway, 2009). Research indicates that a repetition based 
sentence span task may also predict reading ability (Magimairaj & Montgomery, 2012). DS is a 
simple number based repetition task, while sentence span is verbal repetition, which may be 
more impactful in reading ability. Therefore, we investigated whether DS or sentence span 
added unique variance to predicting reading ability after IQ was accounted for in 107 healthy 
adult participants. The participants’ average age was 23.09 years (SD=6.47), and 37.4% were 
male. The ethnicity distribution was as follows: 43.1% Caucasian, 35.3% African American, 
7.8% Hispanic, 11.8% Asian, and 2.0% mixed.  
Hierarchical regression indicated that DS did not predict additional variance in reading after 
accounting for intelligence (WASI Full Scale IQ; Wechsler, 1999). In step 1, intelligence 
accounted for significant variance in reading (R2 =0.34, F(1, 105) =54.46, p<0.01), and was 
correlated with reading ability (β=0.58, B=0.50, SE=0.067, t=7.38, p<0.01). In step 2, DS was 
entered into the second block and did not account for significant variance (∆R2 =0.002, 
∆F(1,104)=0.29, p=n.s.). Results indicate that IQ accounted for 30% of variance in reading 
abilities.  
However, a separate hierarchical regression indicated that sentence span predicts additional 
variance in reading after accounting for intelligence. Similarly, intelligence accounted for 
significant variance in reading (R2 =0.34, F(1, 105)=54.46, p<0.01), and was correlated with 
reading ability (β=0.58, B=0.50, SE=0.067, t=7.38, p<0.01). Sentence span was entered into the 
second block and also accounted for significant variance in reading (∆R2 =0.061, 
∆F(1,104)=10.53, p<.01). Results indicate that IQ scores accounted for 27% of variance, and 
sentence span scores accounted for 9% additional variance in reading ability. Therefore 
indicating that sentence span may be a more valuable contributor to reading ability than digit 
span; furthermore, this finding indicates that sentence span provides potentially valuable 
information, which is not captured in current intelligence measures. Multiple measures, tapping 
into different components of reading capability could assist reading assessment and 
intervention; further research should be conducted to better understand other components of 
reading ability. 
 


Sentence Repetition Predicts Reading Ability Above and Beyond Intelligence in Healthy College Students

ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University

Past research on children indicates that digit span (DS) predicts reading ability, even more so than intelligence measures (Alloway, 2009). Research indicates that a repetition based sentence span task may also predict reading ability (Magimairaj & Montgomery, 2012). DS is a simple number based repetition task, while sentence span is verbal repetition, which may be more impactful in reading ability. Therefore, we investigated whether DS or sentence span added unique variance to predicting reading ability after IQ was accounted for in 107 healthy adult participants. The participants’ average age was 23.09 years (SD=6.47), and 37.4% were male. The ethnicity distribution was as follows: 43.1% Caucasian, 35.3% African American, 7.8% Hispanic, 11.8% Asian, and 2.0% mixed.  Hierarchical regression indicated that DS did not predict additional variance in reading after accounting for intelligence (WASI Full Scale IQ; Wechsler, 1999). In step 1, intelligence accounted for significant variance in reading (R2 =0.34, F(1, 105) =54.46, p<0.01), and was correlated with reading ability (β=0.58, B=0.50, SE=0.067, t=7.38, p<0.01). In step 2, DS was entered into the second block and did not account for significant variance (∆R2 =0.002, ∆F(1,104)=0.29, p=n.s.). Results indicate that IQ accounted for 30% of variance in reading abilities.  However, a separate hierarchical regression indicated that sentence span predicts additional variance in reading after accounting for intelligence. Similarly, intelligence accounted for significant variance in reading (R2 =0.34, F(1, 105)=54.46, p<0.01), and was correlated with reading ability (β=0.58, B=0.50, SE=0.067, t=7.38, p<0.01). Sentence span was entered into the second block and also accounted for significant variance in reading (∆R2 =0.061, ∆F(1,104)=10.53, p<.01). Results indicate that IQ scores accounted for 27% of variance, and sentence span scores accounted for 9% additional variance in reading ability. Therefore indicating that sentence span may be a more valuable contributor to reading ability than digit span; furthermore, this finding indicates that sentence span provides potentially valuable information, which is not captured in current intelligence measures. Multiple measures, tapping into different components of reading capability could assist reading assessment and intervention; further research should be conducted to better understand other components of reading ability.  

https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1205&amp;context=gsurc

Sentence Repetition Predicts Reading Ability Above and Beyond Intelligence in Healthy College Students

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Georgia State University

ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University