The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Relationship between single word decoding and reading comprehension skill.
Abstract
Charles A. Perfetti and Thomas HogaboamLearning Research and Development Center and Department of Psychology,University of PittsburghChildren classified as skilled and less skilled in reading comprehen-sion differed in vocalization latencies to single printed words. Over-all, vocalization latencies were shorter for the skilled group than theloss skilled group and there was an interaction between word typeand comprehension skill. The comprehension groups showed largevocalization latency differences for pseudowords and for low fre-quency English words, but smaller differences for high frequencyEnglish words. Knowledge of word meanings may be a less significantfactor in vocalization latency for the skilled group than for the un-skilled group. It is suggested that at least some unskilled compre-henders may have failed to develop automatic decoding skills andthat this failure may lead to diminished comprehension skills sharinga common processing capacity with nonautomatic decoding.The conceptualization of reading as com-posed of separable components allows morethan one view on the relationship betweenthe components. The cognitive componentsof reading can be considered as separableand independent or as separable and inter-dependent. As Guthrie (1973) has argued,the more tenable view for at least somecomponents is that they are interdependentand mutually facilitative.In the case of decoding and compre-hension, there are similar possibilities ofindependence and interdependence. For atleast some indicators of decoding, it seemsclear that decoding is not sufficient forcomprehension (Cromer, 1970; Wiener &Cromer, 1967). However, it does not followthat decoding and comprehension are in-dependent. Rather, reading comprehensiondepends on the availability of highly de-veloped skills, including the ability toconvert print into the language code.The required conceptualization of theThis research was supported by the LearningResearch and Development Center, which is sup-ported in part by funds from the National Insti-tute of Education.The assistance of Susan Goldman with variousstages of the research is acknowledged.Requests for reprints should be sent to CharlesA. Perfetti, Learning Research and DevelopmentCenter, 3939 O'Hara Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsyl-vania 15260.reading process is one that takes account ofthe fact that all basic processes carried outin a integrated behavior such as readingnot only interact with each other but alsomust share a limited capacity mechanism,at least in part. A mechanism which isheavily demanded by one process essentiallybecomes less available for other processes.Thus, if a reader requires considerableprocessing capacity to decode a single word,his processing capacity is less available forhigher order integrated processesfor ex-ample, memory for the just previouslycoded word may suffer, memory for thepreceding phrase may decrease, and thesubject's ability to predict what he is yetto encounter on the printed page maydiminish.There is evidence that skilled compre-henders have basic word skills that aresuperior to those of unskilled comprehenders.For example, Katz and Wicklund (1971)found differences between good and poorcomprehenders for a word-scanning task inwhich children had to decide whether atarget string of printed words contained apreviously presented key word. Good com-prehender s were faster at thi task thanwere poor comprehenders. However, in asimilar scanning task involving letters, Katzand Wicklund (1972) found no differencebetween reader groups. Thus, at least for461
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Decoding, reading, and reading disability.
Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/074193258600700104 · Cited by 3,972
The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills
Wagner, R. K., & Torgesen, J. K. (1987) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.192 · Cited by 3,303
Memory span: Sources of individual and developmental differences.
Dempster, F. N. (1981) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.89.1.63 · Cited by 587
Sources of Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension and Reading Fluency.
Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.719 · Cited by 580
Intelligence, cognitive skills and early reading progress
Stanovich, K. E., Cunningham, A. E., & Feeman, D. J. (1984) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.2307/747822 · Cited by 408
Metadata
- Authors
- Perfetti, C. A., & Hogaboam, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Psychology
- Published
- 1975-08
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 461-469
- ISSN
- 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2176
- OpenAlex
- W2049102939
- Cited by
- 521
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 21.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Relationship between single word decoding and reading comprehension skill. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/h0077013
- The paper
- Perfetti, C. A., & Hogaboam, T. (1975). Relationship between single word decoding and reading comprehension skill. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077013
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.