The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading
Abstract
This volume is segmented into four sections: historical changes in reading, processes of reading and literacy, models of reading and literacy processes, and new paradigms. The process section should assist students in understanding and visualizing the exploration of important research questions.
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
Stanovich, K. E. (1986) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1598/rrq.21.4.1 · Cited by 5,222
Rayner, K. (2009) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470210902816461 · Cited by 2,682
Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades.
Juel, C. (1988) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.437 · Cited by 1,925
MOJE, E. B., CIECHANOWSKI, K. M., KRAMER, K., ELLIS, L., CARRILLO, R., & COLLAZO, T. (2004) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1598/rrq.39.1.4 · Cited by 1,320
New Technology and Digital Worlds: Analyzing Evidence of Equity in Access, Use, and Outcomes
Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010) · Review of Research in Education · doi:10.3102/0091732x09349791 · Cited by 1,047
Metadata
- Authors
- Barnett, M. A., Singer, H., & Ruddell, R. B.
- Venue
- The Modern Language Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1987
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 77
- ISSN
- 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2051413136
- Cited by
- 3,086
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 60.20
- 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: Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/326762
- The paper
- Barnett, M. A., Singer, H., & Ruddell, R. B. (1987). Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading. The Modern Language Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/326762
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.
