Validation of the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension in grades 7 through 12 |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation and Statistics, University of Houston, 4811 Calhoun Rd, Houston, TX 77204, USA;2. Department of Psychology, University of Houston, 4800 Calhoun Rd, Houston, TX 77004, USA;3. Department of Special Education, University of Texas, 1912 Speedway Stop D5000, Austin, TX 78712, USA;1. Institute of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands;2. Department of Education, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands;3. Learning and Innovation Centre, Avans University of Applied Sciences, Breda, The Netherlands;4. Roosevelt Center for Excellence in Education, University College Roosevelt, Middelburg, The Netherlands;1. Department of Education and Child Studies, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK Leiden, the Netherlands;2. Department of Psychology, Education and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, 3062 PA Rotterdam, the Netherlands;3. ICLON, Leiden University Graduate School of Teaching, Kolffpad 1, 2333 BN Leiden, the Netherlands;1. Niilo Mäki Institute, Finland;2. University of Jyväskylä, Finland |
| |
| Abstract: | This study evaluated the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension (Cromley & Azevedo, 2007) in a large (n = 1196) and diverse (grades 7–12) sample. Multi-indicator latent variables were used to measure six primary constructs: knowledge, vocabulary, word reading, strategies, inference, and reading comprehension. Results corroborated prior research when similar methods were used, but departed from prior findings when measurement error and shared method variance between the predictors and the reading comprehension outcomes (method bias) were controlled. Results generalized across middle and high school, and component skills of reading accounted for virtually all of the systematic variance in reading comprehension. Importantly, controlling method bias diminished the importance of knowledge and vocabulary, and increased the importance of inferencing. Mediated effects of knowledge and vocabulary through inference making were also found. The present study provided a stronger and more generalizable formulation of the DIME model than prior research, and highlighted limitations of using reading-based measures of predictors in component skills models of reading comprehension. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
