“…This model has also been validated in a variety of other alphabetic orthographies (e.g., de Jong & van der Leij, 2002;Florit & Cain, 2011;Kendeu, Papadopoulos, & Kotzapoulou, 2013;Muller & Brady, 2001). However, it has been suggested that, in orthographies with relatively consistent letter-sound mappings, decoding is a less powerful predictor of reading comprehension than in English (e.g., see reviews in Florit & Cain, 2011;García & Cain, 2014;Salceda et al, 2014) because decoding is acquired more quickly in these orthographies (e.g., Caravolas, 2018;Caravolas, Lervåg, Defior, Seidlová Málková, & Hulme, 2013;Leppänen, Niemi, Aunola, & Nurmi, 2004;Parrila, Aunola, Leskinen, Nurmi, & Kirby, 2005;Verhoeven & van Leeuwe, 2011;Wimmer & Goswami, 1994). As a consequence, oral language skills may be a stronger predictor of reading comprehension in consistent orthographies than in English.…”