No abstract

Background Of the myriad of reading comprehension (RC) assessments used in schools, multiple‐choice (MC) questions continue to be one of the most prevalent formats used by educators and researchers. Outcomes from RC assessments dictate many critical factors encountered during a student's academic career, and it is crucial that we gain a deeper understanding of the nuances of these assessments and the types of skills needed for their successful completion. The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine how different component skills (i.e., decoding, word recognition, reading fluency, RC and working memory) were related to students' response accuracy as they read a text and responded to MC questions. Methods We monitored the eye movements of 73 third graders as they read an expository text and answered MC questions. We investigated whether the component skills differentially predicted accuracy across different question types and difficulty levels. Results Results indicated that readers who answered MC questions correctly were able to identify when they needed to reread the text to find the answer and were better able to find the relevant area in the text compared with incorrect responders. Incorrect responders were less likely to reread the text to find the answer and generally had poorer precision when attempting to locate the answer in the text. Finally, the component skills relied upon by readers to answer RC questions were related to the type and difficulty of the questions. Conclusions Results of the present study suggest that comprehension difficulties can arise from a myriad of sources and that reading abilities together with test‐taking strategies impact RC test outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The purpose of the current study was to examine how the morphological structure of a real word or novel word affected the incidental vocabulary learning of participants and to examine how these target items are processed as they are read. In addition, we examined the roles of vocabulary depth and breadth in the process of incidental vocabulary learning. Methods: We had participants read short passages that contained real words or novel words that differed on their morphological accessibility as we collected eye movement data. Participants also completed several vocabulary depth and breadth measures. Results: Accessible real words and novel words were learned better than inaccessible and less accessible items, but there was a processing cost associated with accessible real words compared with inaccessible real words. In contrast, participants spent more time on the less accessible novel words compared with accessible novel words, but that extra processing time did not translate into better acquisition scores. Finally, both vocabulary breadth and depth explained variance in incidental vocabulary acquisition, while breadth explained variance in gaze duration and depth explained variance in regressive eye movements. Conclusions: Accessibility of the targets affected both acquisition and reading time, and depth and breadth are both individual differences that explain variance in incidental acquisition and the processing of those words.