A new tool for measuring and understanding individual differences in the component processes of reading comprehension

By B. Hannon, M. Daneman. 2001

273 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8fd489886a23ce9eaec0aabd9d15f84a36781cbf

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Listening Text Comprehension of Explicit and Implicit Information in Preschoolers: The Role of Verbal and Inferential Skills (2011, background): “Text comprehension, in fact, is not a unitary phenomenon and involves numerous components and resources (Gernsbacher, 1994; Hannon & Daneman, 2001), as has been shown by studies on school-age children’s reading comprehension (for a review, see Cain & Oakhill, 2007).”
Children's Reading Comprehension Ability: Concurrent Prediction by Working Memory, Verbal Ability, and Component Skills. (2004, background): “In a study of adults' comprehension, Hannon and Daneman (2001) found a differentiation between integration and inference-making skills and the processing skills associated with them.”
The Role of Executive Functions in Reading Comprehension (2017, background): “2009) and previous work has extensively examined the relation between working memory and reading comprehension (Budd et al. 1995; Cain et al. 2004; Daneman and Carpenter 1980; Hannon and Daneman 2001; Just and Carpenter 1992; Swanson 1999; Turner and Engle 1989; Waters 1996), we concentrated our eff”
Reversing the Reverse Cohesion Effect: Good Texts Can Be Better for Strategic, High-Knowledge Readers (2007, background): “In contrast to less skilled comprehenders, skilled comprehenders are active processors of text and are more likely to remember more information from the text, make more inferences, use more reading strategies, and integrate the text with prior knowledge ( Cain et al, 2001 ; Hannon & Danemon, 2001 ;”
Influence of Question Format and Text Availability on the Assessment of Expository Text Comprehension (2007, background): “…& McNamara, 2004; see also McNamara, Ozuru, Best, & O’Reilly, 2007, for a review), motivation to exert effort to understand unfamiliar text content (e.g., Guthrie, & Wigfield, 1997; Schomer-Aikins, 2004), as well as cognitive constraints, such as working memory capacity (Hannon & Daneman, 2001).”
Deep‐Level Comprehension of Science Texts: The Role of the Reader and the Text (2005, background): “…word recognition skills may affect comprehension by consuming too much working memory capacity, thus constraining resources that could be used for deep comprehension processes involving inference generation (Cain, Oakhill, & Bryant, 2004; Curtis, 1980; Hannon & Daneman, 2001; Perfetti, 1985).”
The development of reading comprehension skills in children learning English as a second language (2011, background): “…reading efficiency and vocabulary knowledge, sentence-level skills such as knowledge of grammatical structure and higher-level text processing skills such as inference generation and comprehension monitoring (e.g., Hannon & Daneman, 2001; Perfetti & Hart, 2001; Perfetti, Marron, & Foltz, 1996).”
Understanding the Relative Contributions of Lower‐Level Word Processes, Higher‐Level Processes, and Working Memory to Reading Comprehension Performance in Proficient Adult Readers (2012, methodology): “Each component has a high degree of construct validity and reliability; Cronbach’s as are typically 0.86–0.88 (Hannon & Daneman, 2001a).”
The Relations Between Children’s Reading Comprehension, Working Memory, Language Skills and Components of Reading Decoding in a Normal Sample (2005, background): “Working memory tasks designed to tap this ability, such as the Component Processes Task developed by Hannon and Daneman (2001) , are likely to be stronger predictors of reading comprehension than tasks which only measure the functioning of short-term memory.”
Assessing Reading Skill With a Think-Aloud Procedure and Latent Semantic Analysis (2003, background): “…this is an important process for comprehension (e.g., Oakhill, 1994; J. P. Trabasso & Magliano, 1996a; T. Trabasso & Magliano, 1996b), there are other strategies that are also important for text comprehension (Hannon & Daneman, 2001; McNamara & Scott, 1999; Palincsar & Brown, 1986; Pressley, 1995).”
Measures of Reading Comprehension: A Latent Variable Analysis of the Diagnostic Assessment of Reading Comprehension (2006, methodology): “Hannon and Daneman (2001) confirmed theconclusions fromPotts andPeterson’swork,usingaversionof the test thathadmorecomplex texts forusewithuniversity students.”
Differential Competencies Contributing to Children's Comprehension of Narrative and Expository Texts (2008, background): “Many theorists assume that slow or inaccurate decoding skills appear to consume working memory resources that might otherwise be used for comprehension processes, such as inference generation (Cain, Oakhill, & Bryant, 2004; Curtis, 1980; Hannon & Daneman, 2001; Perfetti, 1985).”
The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts (2007, background): “When the text calls for it, the readers with misconceptions activate and integrate their background knowledge with the textual information as frequently as do readers without misconceptions (see also Hannon & Daneman, 2001; Kintsch, 1988).”