Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Learning Disabilities01:25

Learning Disabilities

Learning disabilities are cognitive disorders caused by neurological impairments that affect cognitive functions like language and reading, without indicating overall intellectual or developmental challenges. These disabilities differ from global intellectual or developmental disabilities as they are limited to distinct cognitive functions. Common learning disabilities include dysgraphia, dyslexia, and dyscalculia, each of which impacts unique aspects of learning.
Dyslexia
Dyslexia is a...
Multiple Comparison Tests01:13

Multiple Comparison Tests

Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
Group Design02:01

Group Design

The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between the two are due to...
Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test01:09

Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test

The t-test is a statistical method used to compare the sample mean with a population mean or compare two means from two data sets. The test statistic is calculated from the standard deviation, mean, and number of measurements in the data set at a selected confidence interval and then compared to a table of critical values at this confidence level. If the test statistic is smaller than the critical value, the null hypothesis is accepted. In this case, we state that the difference between the...
Binet's Contribution to Measures of Intelligence01:23

Binet's Contribution to Measures of Intelligence

Alfred Binet, along with his student Théophile Simon, was tasked by the French Ministry of Education in 1904 to create a method for identifying students who struggled to learn through conventional classroom instruction. This initiative aimed to address overcrowding by placing such students in specialized schools. Binet and Simon developed an intelligence test comprising 30 tasks, ranging from simple commands, like touching one's nose or ear, to more complex tasks, such as drawing designs from...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

How Specific Are Learning Disabilities?

Journal of learning disabilities·2021
Same author

Understanding Comorbidity Between Specific Learning Disabilities.

New directions for child and adolescent development·2019
Same author

The genetic and environmental etiologies of the relations between cognitive skills and components of reading ability.

Journal of experimental psychology. General·2016
Same author

Issues in Identifying Poor Comprehenders.

L'annee psychologique·2015
Same author

Longitudinal stability in reading comprehension is largely heritable from grades 1 to 6.

PloS one·2015
Same author

A retrospective longitudinal study of cognitive and language skills in poor reading comprehension.

Scandinavian journal of psychology·2015
Same journal

Associations Between Self-Reported Literacy and Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms in Children, Adolescents, and Older Adults.

Journal of learning disabilities·2026
Same journal

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Learning Disabilities Identification in U.S. Elementary Schools.

Journal of learning disabilities·2026
Same journal

Universal Screening of Early Numeracy Skills in Spanish-Speaking Kindergarteners.

Journal of learning disabilities·2026
Same journal

AI Chatbots and Dyslexia: How AI Chatbots Empower Students With Dyslexia to Master Arithmetic Word Problems.

Journal of learning disabilities·2026
Same journal

Instructional Decision-Making for Students With Intensive Early Writing Needs: Student Growth in Sentence-Level Curriculum-Based Measurement.

Journal of learning disabilities·2026
Same journal

Effects of Calculation and Reading Fluency Interventions Focusing on Awareness and Adaptive Use of Strategies: Supporting Children With Comorbid Fluency Problems.

Journal of learning disabilities·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 23, 2026

Decomposing the Variance in Reading Comprehension to Reveal the Unique and Common Effects of Language and Decoding
06:33

Decomposing the Variance in Reading Comprehension to Reveal the Unique and Common Effects of Language and Decoding

Published on: October 11, 2018

Test differences in diagnosing reading comprehension deficits.

Janice M Keenan1, Chelsea E Meenan

  • 11University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA.

Journal of Learning Disabilities
|March 24, 2012
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Reading comprehension tests show significant differences in identifying deficits, with only 43% average overlap. This impacts accurate diagnosis, especially for older children, affecting educational interventions.

Keywords:
classificationcomprehensionidentification

More Related Videos

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing
09:00

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing

Published on: August 16, 2024

Eye-tracking to Distinguish Comprehension-based and Oculomotor-based Regressive Eye Movements During Reading
05:54

Eye-tracking to Distinguish Comprehension-based and Oculomotor-based Regressive Eye Movements During Reading

Published on: October 18, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 23, 2026

Decomposing the Variance in Reading Comprehension to Reveal the Unique and Common Effects of Language and Decoding
06:33

Decomposing the Variance in Reading Comprehension to Reveal the Unique and Common Effects of Language and Decoding

Published on: October 11, 2018

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing
09:00

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing

Published on: August 16, 2024

Eye-tracking to Distinguish Comprehension-based and Oculomotor-based Regressive Eye Movements During Reading
05:54

Eye-tracking to Distinguish Comprehension-based and Oculomotor-based Regressive Eye Movements During Reading

Published on: October 18, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Educational Psychology
  • Developmental Psychology
  • Neuroscience

Background:

  • Accurate diagnosis of reading comprehension deficits is crucial for effective intervention.
  • Existing reading comprehension tests may vary in their diagnostic capabilities.
  • Understanding these variations is key to improving assessment practices.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To examine the implications of test differences in defining and diagnosing reading comprehension deficits.
  • To compare the diagnostic consistency of four widely used reading comprehension tests.
  • To investigate the characteristics of children identified differently by these tests.

Main Methods:

  • Administered four standardized reading comprehension tests to 995 children.
  • Compared the identification of children in the lowest 10% performance across tests.
  • Analyzed profile variables (decoding, IQ, ADHD, working memory) for discrepant diagnoses.

Main Results:

  • Average overlap in diagnosing comprehension difficulties between tests was only 43%.
  • Diagnostic consistency was higher for younger children than older children.
  • Inconsistencies were also noted in identifying high-achieving students.

Conclusions:

  • Significant test variability exists in identifying reading comprehension deficits.
  • These differences have theoretical and practical implications for assessment and intervention.
  • Further research is needed to understand the specific skills each test measures.