Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Individual Differences in Reading Development: A Review of 25 Years of Empirical Research on Matthew Effects in Reading
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Individual Differences in Reading Development: A Review of 25 Years of Empirical Research on Matthew Effects in Reading
Do you wish to request the book?
Individual Differences in Reading Development: A Review of 25 Years of Empirical Research on Matthew Effects in Reading
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Individual Differences in Reading Development: A Review of 25 Years of Empirical Research on Matthew Effects in Reading
2014
Overview
The idea of Matthew effects in reading—the widening achievement gap between good and poor readers—has attracted considerable attention in education research in the past 25 years. Despite the popularity of the topic, however, empirical studies that have analyzed the core assumption of Matthew effects in reading have produced inconsistent results. This review summarizes the empirical findings on the development of early interindividual differences in reading. We did not find strong support for the general validity of a pattern of widening achievement differences or for a pattern of decreasing achievement differences in reading. The inclusion of moderating variables, however, allowed a clearer picture to be painted. Matthew effects were more likely to occur for measures of decoding efficiency, vocabulary, and composite reading scores when the achievement tests were not affected by deficits in measurement precision. Furthermore, moderators such as the applied analytic method or the orthographic consistency of the language were of less importance for the emergence of Matthew effects in reading. An additional meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between a baseline level and a growth parameter yielded a small, negative mean correlation (r = -.214), which again was moderated by properties of the measures. Possible explanations for the reported findings are discussed.
