On the Johnson-Neyman technique and some extensions thereof

Potthoff, Richard F.

doi:10.1007/bf02289721

Cited by 153 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The interaction between the reading progress (time) and the Training condition was further examined by means of the Johnson-Neyman procedure (Aiken & West, 1991;Johnson & Neyman, 1936;Potthoff, 1964). With this method, significance regions for the interaction were defined, producing limits beyond which differences between the training group and the control group were significant.…”

Section: Reading Speed Regarding Trained Syllablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Training in Syllable Recognition Improve Reading Speed? A Computer-Based Trial With Poor Readers From Second and Third Grade

Heikkilä

Aro

Närhi

et al. 2013

Scientific Studies of Reading

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research evaluated the ability to retrieve and fluently name serially presented familiar items, known as rapid automatized naming (RAN), as an underlying skill in reading disability and its role in a reading fluency intervention. The specificity of RAN on reading was examined in two studies among children with learning difficulties. These two studies showed that RAN was most strongly related to reading disabilities (RD), and less clearly related to math or attention deficits. This was especially true when RD was defined as reading speed or fluency. The association between RAN and RD was also examined within the framework of the double-deficit hypothesis (DDH), in which RAN is assumed to contribute independently to RD along with phonological awareness. The results among children with learning difficulties supported the DDH in that RAN was not related to phonological awareness but had a unique connection with reading fluency and speed. Children with double-deficit performed poorer in reading and spelling skills compared to the groups with a single deficit or controls. The reading fluency intervention, conducted among children with poor reading skill, showed significant effects on the repeated recognition of sublexical units (syllables). Moreover, a wordlevel transfer effect, which was also the strongest syllable-level intervention effect, was found for infrequent syllables. Reading fluency gains were greatest for the children with the lowest pre-intervention reading skills. The results showed that although RAN was associated with initial reading speed, it did not have an effect on the intervention gains. These studies strengthen the role of RAN as an independent skill underlying reading disabilities in a transparent language (Finnish) where reading disabilities are most strongly manifested as dysfluent reading. While comorbid learning problems were common and should be acknowledged in the assessment and intervention of reading, the slow naming speed found here indicated deficits specific to reading fluency. Despite the persistent nature of naming and reading fluency deficits, reading fluency does not seem to be resistant to intervention even when accompanied with naming speed deficits.Keywords: rapid automatized naming, reading disabilities, reading fluency, reading speed, learning disability, comorbidity, reading intervention Tämän tutkimuksen keskiössä olivat lukemisen sujuvuus sekä nopea sarjallinen nimeäminen (rapid automatized naming, RAN), kyky hakea mielestä ja nimetä sujuvasti sarjallisessa muodossa esitettyjä tuttuja nimikkeitä. Tässä tutkimuksessa arvioitiin erityisesti RAN:n roolia lukemisvaikeuksien taustataitona sekä sen yhteyttä lukemisen sujuvuuden kuntouttamiseen. RAN:n spesifiä yhteyttä lukemiseen tutkittiin kahdessa osatutkimuksessa, joiden kohderyhmänä olivat kouluikäiset oppimisvaikeuksiset lapset. Tulokset osoittivat, että RAN oli matematiikan ja tarkkavuuden ongelmia vahvemmin yhteydessä lukemisvaikeuksiin, erityisesti kun lukemisvaikeus oli määritelty lukemisen nopeuden tai suj...

show abstract

Section: Reading Speed Regarding Trained Syllablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Training in Syllable Recognition Improve Reading Speed? A Computer-Based Trial With Poor Readers From Second and Third Grade

Heikkilä

Aro

Närhi

et al. 2013

Scientific Studies of Reading

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…12 no. 3 Substituting these values in the Potthoff (1964) formulae presented earlier, it may be found that P = 58.8 and R = 55.4 and 62.2, the temporary variables A, B, and C having values of 0.8432, −49.5675, and 2903.876, respectively. Therefore, the crossover point of the two regression lines is 58.8, the value associated with the lower SROS is 55.4, and the value associated with the upper SROS is 62.2.…”

Section: Simultaneous Regions Of Significance (R )mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Consequently, alternative analytical approaches must be considered, which may include the Johnson-Neyman procedure (Fraas & Newman, 1997;Karpman, 1983;Kowalski, Schneiderman, & Willis, 1994;Rogosa, 1981) and extensions thereof, such as that proposed by Potthoff (1964). For the sake of simplicity, let's consider formulae constructed by Potthoff (1964) as a modification to the Johnson-Neyman procedure (Aiken & West, 1991;D'Alonzo, 2004;Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991;Rogosa, 1981). These formulae allow for calculations of the point of intersection (crossover point) of regression lines, and what are known as simultaneous regions of significance (SROS).…”

Section: Identify An Alternative Analytical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These formulae allow for calculations of the point of intersection (crossover point) of regression lines, and what are known as simultaneous regions of significance (SROS). Potthoff (1964) explains that a "simultaneous" region of significance is a region that "with confidence ≥ 95 percent (for α = .05), we can state that the two groups test scores for Treatment 2, and one region wherein posttest scores for Treatment 2 are significantly higher than post-test scores for Treatment 1, as illustrated by equation (1). Derivations of each of the terms in the formulae below are described in subsequent sections.…”

Section: Identify An Alternative Analytical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Violation of the homogeneity of regression slopes assumption in ANCOVA for two-group pre-post designs: Tutorial on a modified Johnson-Neyman procedure

Johnson¹

2016

TQMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aptitude-treatment interaction (ATI) effects are present when individuals demonstrate differential outcomes across treatments based upon aptitude-that is, any measurable individual characteristic, attribute, or ability (e.g., anxiety, learning style, motivation, prior knowledge). ATI effects may exist in data from one design commonly used in psychological and educational research-the two-group pre-post design-in which pre-intervention scores may be considered to reflect individual aptitude. Researchers may mistakenly overlook these effects, however, due to inappropriate analytical approaches. When applying analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), it is important to check for ANCOVA assumptions, including an assumption known as homogeneity of regression slopes. When heterogeneity of regression slopes is found, ATI effects are revealed. Consequently, alternative approaches to ANCOVA must be sought. Using formulae based on the Johnson-Neyman procedure to define simultaneous regions of significance is one straightforward alternative. This tutorial outlines the process for analyzing data resulting from two-group pre-post studies when data violate the ANCOVA assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes. What was initially viewed as an obstacle may result in the discovery of an ATI effect, which may be described statistically through simple mathematical calculations.

show abstract

“…Other statistical procedures for assessing group differences include extensions of the Johnson-Neyman procedure for establishing regions of predictor-variable values in which groups significantly differ in their expected criterion scores (Potthoff 1964) and iterative, exploratory procedures for allowing the regression weights of individuals to emerge in ways that maximize prediction accuracy (Cleary 1966a). …”

Section: Detecting Group Differences In Test and Criterion Regressionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Contributions: Focus on Test Scores

Moses¹

2017

Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the Johnson-Neyman technique and some extensions thereof

Cited by 153 publications

References 4 publications

Does Training in Syllable Recognition Improve Reading Speed? A Computer-Based Trial With Poor Readers From Second and Third Grade

Does Training in Syllable Recognition Improve Reading Speed? A Computer-Based Trial With Poor Readers From Second and Third Grade

Violation of the homogeneity of regression slopes assumption in ANCOVA for two-group pre-post designs: Tutorial on a modified Johnson-Neyman procedure

Psychometric Contributions: Focus on Test Scores

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About