CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 302Reading and Literacy DevelopmentLanguage Development and DisordersSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Matthew Effects in Young Readers: Reading Comprehension and Reading Experience Aid Vocabulary Development

Open access
Cain, Kate, Oakhill, Jane·2011·Journal of Learning Disabilities
DOI 10.1177/0022219411410042
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The authors report data from a longitudinal study of the reading development of children who were assessed in the years of their 8th, 11th, 14th, and 16th birthdays. They examine the evidence for Matthew effects in reading and vocabulary between ages 8 and 11 in groups of children identified with good and poor reading comprehension at 8 years. They also investigate evidence for Matthew effects in reading and vocabulary between 8 and 16 years, in the larger sample. The poor comprehenders showed reduced growth in vocabulary compared to the good comprehenders, but not in word reading or reading comprehension ability. They also obtained lower scores on measures of out-of-school literacy. Analyses of the whole sample revealed that initial levels of reading experience and reading comprehension predicted vocabulary at ages 11, 14, and 16 after controlling for general ability and vocabulary skills when aged 8. The authors discuss these findings in relation to the influence of reading on vocabulary development.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022219411410042

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 43 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. 10.1037/0012-1649.34.6.1373 · DOI
  2. 10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.934 · DOI
  3. Cunningham A. E., 1998, American Educator, 22, 8
  4. Dunn L. M., 1992, British Picture Vocabulary Scale
  5. Educational Assessment Unit, 1999, Edinburgh Reading Test
  6. MacGinitie W. H., 2000, Gates–MacGinitie Reading Tests
  7. Neale M. D., 1989, The Neale Analysis of Reading Ability–Revised (NARA-II)
  8. Perfetti C. A., 1985, Reading ability

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 302

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cain, K., & Oakhill, J.
Affiliations
  • Lancaster University (GB)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Cain, Kate
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Learning Disabilities
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2011-07-19
Volume
44
Issue
5
Pages
431-443
ISSN
  • 0022-2194 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4780
DOI
10.1177/0022219411410042
OpenAlex
W2154775139
Cited by
300
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 51 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 6
FWCI
24.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Learning Disabilities (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
Matthew effect, reading comprehension, vocabulary development, reading development, children, longitudinal study, out-of-school literacy, reading experience, reading comprehension difficulties, word reading
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Dyslexia, Educational Measurement, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Models, Psychological, Reading, Vocabulary, Comprehension

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