The Simple View of Reading: Is it valid for different types of
alphabetic orthographies? – Florit & Cain (2011)
Variables: age, grade, reading comprehension, decoding, linguistic comprehension, early reading
development.
Method: quantitative meta-analysis involving 33 studies with children aged 4–11 years from various
countries, grouped by schooling or age, using standardized measures of reading comprehension,
decoding, and linguistic comprehension. Comparison between beginner and more advanced readers
based on years of schooling, and within chronological age.
Hypothesis: In beginner readers, decoding should be more closely linked to reading comprehension
than linguistic comprehension, with the reverse for older readers. Non-word decoding is a better
predictor of reading comprehension for beginners than real word reading
Aim: determining whether the Simple View of Reading (SVR), which has been tested primarily on
English readers, is valid and applicable for beginner readers of transparent (non-English) alphabetic
orthographies.
Research questions and results:
1. Is the developmental pattern of the strength of the relations between decoding and reading
comprehension, and also linguistic comprehension and reading comprehension, different for
readers of different alphabetic orthographies?
English Readers:
o For beginners, decoding is more linked to reading comprehension than
linguistic comprehension.
o For older readers, linguistic comprehension is more predictive of reading
comprehension, especially with non-word decoding.
Transparent Orthographies:
o Beginners: Linguistic comprehension is a strong predictor of reading
comprehension.
o Older readers: Linguistic comprehension remains important, but decoding
accuracy also plays a significant role.
Comparison:
o In transparent orthographies, linguistic comprehension better predicts
reading comprehension for beginners.
o Decoding is a stronger predictor of reading comprehension in English
readers at both beginner and advanced levels.
2. Do the relations between decoding and reading comprehension depend on the way that
decoding is measured, and does this differ for orthographies that vary in transparency and
across years of schooling?
English readers:
o Both age groups: Decoding with real words is more strongly related to
reading comprehension than non-word decoding.
o Beginners: Both decoding accuracy and fluency have a large impact on
reading comprehension.
o Older readers: Word decoding accuracy is more strongly related to reading
comprehension than fluency.
alphabetic orthographies? – Florit & Cain (2011)
Variables: age, grade, reading comprehension, decoding, linguistic comprehension, early reading
development.
Method: quantitative meta-analysis involving 33 studies with children aged 4–11 years from various
countries, grouped by schooling or age, using standardized measures of reading comprehension,
decoding, and linguistic comprehension. Comparison between beginner and more advanced readers
based on years of schooling, and within chronological age.
Hypothesis: In beginner readers, decoding should be more closely linked to reading comprehension
than linguistic comprehension, with the reverse for older readers. Non-word decoding is a better
predictor of reading comprehension for beginners than real word reading
Aim: determining whether the Simple View of Reading (SVR), which has been tested primarily on
English readers, is valid and applicable for beginner readers of transparent (non-English) alphabetic
orthographies.
Research questions and results:
1. Is the developmental pattern of the strength of the relations between decoding and reading
comprehension, and also linguistic comprehension and reading comprehension, different for
readers of different alphabetic orthographies?
English Readers:
o For beginners, decoding is more linked to reading comprehension than
linguistic comprehension.
o For older readers, linguistic comprehension is more predictive of reading
comprehension, especially with non-word decoding.
Transparent Orthographies:
o Beginners: Linguistic comprehension is a strong predictor of reading
comprehension.
o Older readers: Linguistic comprehension remains important, but decoding
accuracy also plays a significant role.
Comparison:
o In transparent orthographies, linguistic comprehension better predicts
reading comprehension for beginners.
o Decoding is a stronger predictor of reading comprehension in English
readers at both beginner and advanced levels.
2. Do the relations between decoding and reading comprehension depend on the way that
decoding is measured, and does this differ for orthographies that vary in transparency and
across years of schooling?
English readers:
o Both age groups: Decoding with real words is more strongly related to
reading comprehension than non-word decoding.
o Beginners: Both decoding accuracy and fluency have a large impact on
reading comprehension.
o Older readers: Word decoding accuracy is more strongly related to reading
comprehension than fluency.
