Knowledge growth and maintenance across the life span: The role of print exposure.

Abstract

One hundred thirty-three college students (mean age = 19.1 years) and 49 older individuals (mean age = 79.9 years) completed 2 general knowledge tasks, a vocabulary task, a working memory task, a syllogistic reasoning task, and several measures of exposure to print. A series of hierarchical regression analyses indicated that when measures of exposure to print were used as control variables, the positive relationships between age and vocabulary, and age and declarative knowledge, were eliminated. Within each of the age groups, exposure to print was a significant predictor of vocabulary and declarative knowledge even after differences in working memory, general ability, and educational level were controlled. These results support the theory of fluid-crystallized intelligence and suggest a more prominent role for exposure to print in theories of individual differences in knowledge acquisition and maintenance.

Individual differences in the perceptual span during reading: Evidence from the moving window technique

“…Many prior studies have used the Author Recognition Test (ART; Stanovich & West, 1989) as a measure of an individual's exposure to print, showing that ART scores are correlated highly with vocabulary knowledge, declarative knowledge, reading comprehension, academic performance, and logical reasoning (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1990, 1997Stanovich & West, 1989;Acheson, Wells, & MacDonald, 2008;West, Stanovich, & Mitchell, 1993; for a comprehensive review, see Mol & Bus, 2011). Acheson et al (2008) reported that, although measures of print exposure were correlated significantly with reading-related performance measured by verbal ACT scores (Stanovich, West, & Harrison, 1995), the correlations between print exposure and online measures of reading ability such as reading rate (as measured by a self-paced reading task) and comprehension accuracy were not reliable. In the current study, we re-examined the relationship between print exposure and online measures of reading by employing eye tracking methodology, which allows us to examine natural reading processes.…”

Reading Trends and College-Age Students: The Research, the Issues, and the Role of Libraries

“…Stanovich and his colleagues found that people who read more exhibited broader and deeper general knowledge. 15 Numerous studies have shown that increased reading correlates with greater writing skills, an enlarged vocabulary, and grammatical proficiency. It is very difficult to become a skilled writer without being a committed reader.…”

Reading and Rereading: Insights Into Literary Evaluation

“…As we believe that appreciation of literature is connected to the amount of reading a person does, an additional measure we used in one of the studies concerns the so-called ART test, which we will detail in the following section. Stanovich et al (1995) developed the ART test (Author Recognition Test) to assess respondents' general reading habits. The test involves a list of names, both real names (or pseudonyms) and fake names (foils) that sound like those of prominent people, but are definitely not authors.…”

“…It also predicts the size of participants' vocabulary. Moreover, Stanovich et al (1995) used a statistical technique (called hierarchical regression analysis) to examine whether other factors, such as age, gender, IQ, level of education, etc. might influence people's scores.…”

“…Hence we present the results of some experiments in which two different groups of participants (university students and older people in a convenience sample) in two cultural settings read three texts (one popular fiction and two canonical ones) several times and answered the three questions derived from the -rereading paradigm‖ by Bortolussi & Dixon (2003). As an additional measure to check the participants reading habits, in Study 1 the ART test from Stanovich et al (1995), adapted for a Ukrainian audience, was employed. The results, which did not corroborate the predictions, are discussed and confronted with some insights into the theory of literary evaluation.…”