The Simple View of Reading: Advancements and False Impressions

By H. Catts. Remedial and special education, 2018

106 citations recorded by the source corpus.

In this article, I highlight the impact that the simple view of reading (SVR) has had on the field of reading over the last 30 years. I argue that the SVR has led to many significant advancements in our understanding of reading comprehension. I also contend that it has contributed to some false impressions concerning comprehension that impact research and practice in important ways.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fc617bc83a27df5bef098440e10774715e07796f

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

1. Wesley A. Hoover
2. Nell K. Duke
3. Kate Nation
4. Kelly B. Cartwright
5. W. Tunmer

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. W. Tunmer
2. Wesley A. Hoover
3. Kelly B. Cartwright
4. Nell K. Duke
5. Kate Nation
6. K. Cain
7. Y. Chiu
8. Y. Kim

Citations in the corpus

• The Science of Reading Progresses: Communicating Advances Beyond the Simple View of Reading (2021, background): “Over decades, research studies have identified many productive modifications and additions to the original SVR, and many researchers have pointed to directions for understanding reading beyond the SVR (e.g., Catts, 2018; Cervetti et al., 2020; Hoffman, 2009; Nation, 2019; Snow, 2018).”
• The cognitive foundations of learning to read: a framework for preventing and remediating reading difficulties (2019, background): “The failure to fully appreciate the importance of distinguishing between conceptual and measurement issues in evaluating the validity of the SVR has, in our view, led to unfair criticisms of the model (Catts, 2018; Nation, 2019; Snow, 2018).”
• Children’s reading difficulties, language, and reflections on the simple view of reading (2019, background): “Some experiments have compared words and nonwords while others have investigated whether fluency is a better index than accuracy (e.g., Adlof, Catts, & Little, 2006; LARRC, 2015).”