The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Method of Repeated Readings: Expanding the Neurological Impress Method for Use with Disabled Readers
Abstract
Many disabled readers decode text in a word-by-word fashion and consequently have difficulty understanding what they read. This failure is often attributed to their inability to focus attention simultaneously on decoding and comprehending the message. However, this undesirable outcome can be avoided through the method of repeated readings. By having children reread a passage until fluency is achieved, their attention can be focused on comprehension, and improved understanding will result.
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
Schönemann, P. H. (1985) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x0002063x · Cited by 889
Fluency: Bridge Between Decoding and Reading Comprehension
Pikulski, J. J., & Chard, D. J. (2005) · The Reading Teacher · doi:10.1598/rt.58.6.2 · Cited by 649
Reading Fluency Assessment and Instruction: What, Why, and How?
Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2005) · The Reading Teacher · doi:10.1598/rt.58.8.1 · Cited by 527
The nature of the black–white difference on various psychometric tests: Spearman's hypothesis
Jensen, A. R. (1985) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00020392 · Cited by 284
Gordon, R. A. (1985) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00020501 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Kann, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Learning Disabilities
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1983-02
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 90-92
- ISSN
- 0022-2194 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4780
- OpenAlex
- W2080266085
- Cited by
- 356
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 22.48
- 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: The Method of Repeated Readings: Expanding the Neurological Impress Method for Use with Disabled Readers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/002221948301600205
- The paper
- Kann, R. (1983). The Method of Repeated Readings: Expanding the Neurological Impress Method for Use with Disabled Readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948301600205
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.
