Neurological origins of poor reading comprehension despite fast word decoding?

Barnes, Faulkner, and Dennis (2001) found that hydrocephalic children (mean age = 11.5 years) of average or above-average verbal intelligence exhibit poor reading comprehension despite their fast and accurate decoding skills on individual words. This finding attracts the attention of reading researchers because it appears to be against the following standard principle of reading comprehension failure (Gough & Hillinger, 1980), thereby provoking basic issues centering around it (e.g., Stanovich, 1991): Reading Comprehension = Word Decoding x Listening Comprehension. This formula indicates that when listening comprehension is kept well within the normal range, reading comprehension is highly correlated with word decoding (e.g., Perfetti, 1985). In contrast, with poor listening comprehension children would be poor readers however good they may be at reading words (e.g., Cain, Oakhill, & Bryant, 2000). Although Barnes et al. clearly demonstrated that children with hydrocephalus decoded individual words better than they comprehended text, it is not readily apparent whether their findings are inconsistent with the standard principle. The purpose of the present article is twofold. The first is to examine whether Barnes et al.'s findings constitute a counterexample of the above principle. (Note that Barnes et al. did not address this question.) The second and more important purpose is to discuss the possible origins of the decoding-better-than-sentence/text-comprehension pattern. We also present some pedagogical implications for poor readers such as hydrocephalic children.