Cited by 98Reading and Literacy DevelopmentLiteracy and Educational PracticesCognitive Abilities and Testing

Why do children read more? The influence of reading ability on voluntary reading practices

Open access
van Bergen, Elsje, Snowling, Margaret J., de Zeeuw, Eveline L., van Beijsterveldt, Catharina E.M., Dolan, Conor V., Boomsma, Dorret I.·2018·Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study investigates the causal relationships between reading and print exposure and investigates whether the amount children read outside school determines how well they read, or vice versa. Previous findings from behavioural studies suggest that reading predicts print exposure. Here, we use twin-data and apply the behaviour-genetic approach of direction of causality modelling, suggested by Heath et al. (), to investigate the causal relationships between these two traits. METHOD: Partial data were available for a large sample of twin children (N = 11,559) and 262 siblings, all enrolled in the Netherlands Twin Register. Children were assessed around 7.5 years of age. Mothers completed questionnaires reporting children's time spent on reading activities and reading ability. Additional information on reading ability was available through teacher ratings and performance on national reading tests. For siblings reading test, results were available. RESULTS: The reading ability of the twins was comparable to that of the siblings and national norms, showing that twin findings can be generalized to the population. A measurement model was specified with two latent variables, Reading Ability and Print Exposure, which correlated .41. Heritability analyses showed that Reading Ability was highly heritable, while genetic and environmental influences were equally important for Print Exposure. We exploited the fact that the two constructs differ in genetic architecture and fitted direction of causality models. The results supported a causal relationship running from Reading Ability to Print Exposure. CONCLUSIONS: How much and how well children read are moderately correlated. Individual differences in print exposure are less heritable than individual differences in reading ability. Importantly, the present results suggest that it is the children's reading ability that determines how much they choose to read, rather than vice versa.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jcpp.12910

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Muth en, L.K., & Muth en, B.O. (1998-2015). Mplus User's Guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muth en & Muth en.
  2. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health. doi:10.1111/jcpp.12910 The causal influence of reading ability on print exposure

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Bergen, E., Snowling, M. J., de Zeeuw, E. L., van Beijsterveldt, C. E. M., Dolan, C. V., & Boomsma, D. I.
Affiliations
  • Biological Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Amsterdam The Netherlands
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Venue
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-04-10
Volume
59
Issue
11
Pages
1205-1214
ISSN
  • 0021-9630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7610
OpenAlex
W2797512662
Cited by
98
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 3
FWCI
16.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen (PAH/6635)
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (024.001.003, 451‐15‐017, 480‐15‐001/674)
  • Seventh Framework Programme (602768)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › Literacy and Educational Practices
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
reading skills, voluntary reading, print exposure, reading practices, causal direction, heritability, genetic architecture, environmental influences, children, twin studies, sibling comparison
MeSH terms
Aptitude, Child, Child Behavior, Dyslexia, Female, Humans, Male, Reading, Registries, Twins, Twins, Dizygotic, Twins, Monozygotic, Siblings

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