Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 129Reading and Literacy DevelopmentDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyBehavioral and Psychological Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reading Disability Defined as a Discrepancy Betwveen Listening and Reading Comprehension: A Longitudinal Study of Stability, Gender Differences, and Prevalence

Badian, Nathlie A.·1999·Journal of Learning Disabilities

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether defining reading disability by a discrepancy between group-administered tests of listening and reading comprehension would produce result similar in terms of stability, gender ratio, and prevalence to IQ-achievement test discrepancy definitions. The total population of a small school district ( N = 1,008) was followed from prekindergarten through Grade 7-8 for 13 years. As is often seen in epidemiological studies using IQ and individually administered reading tests to define reading disability, stability in the classification of reading disability was low. Among the participants with a consistent reading disability, the male-to-female ratio was 3.2:1, compared with 1.3:1 for the 5.1% of the sample who were nondiscrepant poor readers in both lower and upper grades. A mean 2.7% of the population was classified as reading disabled over the eight-grade span, and only 1.7% demonstrated a consistent reading disability in both the lower and the upper grades. An increase in the ratio of nondiscrepant to discrepant poor readers after Grade 5 was due mainly to late-emerging poor readers. It was concluded that defining reading comprehension disability in terms of a discrepancy between listening and reading comprehension provides a fairly accurate estimate of the stability, gender ratio, and prevalence of the disorder.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/002221949903200204

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. 10.1177/002221949102400306 · DOI
  2. 10.1007/BF02648247 · DOI
  3. 10.1007/BF00419386 · DOI
  4. 10.1007/BF02928176 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/BF02648146 · DOI
  6. 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1987.tb03062.x · DOI
  7. 10.1177/002221948902200905 · DOI
  8. Finucci, J.M. & Childs, B. (1981). Are there really more dyslexic boys than girls? In A. Ansara, N. Geschwind, A. Galaburda, M. Albert, & N. Gartrell (Eds.), Sex differences in dyslexia (pp.1-9). Towson, MD: Orton Dyslexia Society.
  9. 10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.6 · DOI
  10. 10.1002/1520-6807(199401)31:1<66::AID-PITS2310310109>3.0.CO;2-J · DOI
  11. Gardner, E.F., 1982, Stanford achievement test
  12. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1986.tb00619.x · DOI
  13. Lyon, G.R., 1995, Annals of Dyslexia, 45, 3
  14. 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1988.tb00908.x · DOI
  15. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1975.tb01269.x · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1986.tb02643.x · DOI
  17. 10.1056/NEJM199201163260301 · DOI
  18. 10.1001/jama.1990.03450080084036 · DOI
  19. 10.1177/002221948902200803 · DOI
  20. 10.1177/002221949202501001 · DOI
  21. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1985.tb01942.x · DOI
  22. 10.1177/002221949002300112 · DOI
  23. 10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.2307/1510663 · DOI
  25. Stanovich, K.E. (1993). The construct validity of discrepancy definitions of reading disability. In G. R. Lyon, D. B. Gray, J. F. Kavanagh , & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Better understanding of learning disabilities: New views from research and their implications for education and public policies (pp. 273-307). Baltimore: Brookes.
  26. 10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.24 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Wechsler, D., 1963, Wechsler preschool and primary scale of intelligence
  28. Wechsler, D., 1974, Wechsler intelligence scale for children-Revised
  29. 10.1111/j.1467-9817.1996.tb00086.x · DOI

Cited by

See all 129

Metadata

Authors
Badian, N. A.
Affiliations
Boston Children's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Badian, Nathlie A.
Venue
Journal of Learning Disabilities
Published
1999-03
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
138-148
ISSN
  • 0022-2194 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4780
OpenAlex
W2116699844
Cited by
129
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
6.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Learning Disabilities (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Keywords
reading disorders, listening comprehension, reading comprehension, IQ-achievement discrepancy, diagnostic stability, sex ratio, prevalence, longitudinal follow-up
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Auditory Perception, Child, Child, Preschool, Cross-Sectional Studies, Dyslexia, Educational Status, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Reading, Sex Ratio, 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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reading Disability Defined as a Discrepancy Betwveen Listening and Reading Comprehension: A Longitudinal Study of Stability, Gender Differences, and Prevalence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/002221949903200204
The paper
Badian, N. A. (1999). Reading Disability Defined as a Discrepancy Betwveen Listening and Reading Comprehension: A Longitudinal Study of Stability, Gender Differences, and Prevalence. Journal of Learning Disabilities. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949903200204

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.