This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by van Bon, W. H.J. Articles by van den Hurk, A. J.M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by van Bon, W. H.J. Articles by van den Hurk, A. J.M. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Comparison of Three Methods of Reading-While-Listening

Wim H.J. van Bon is a senior lecturer of special education at the University of Nijmegen, the Netherlands. His research focuses on language factors in reading and spelling problems. His coauthors graduated in 1989 from the Department of Special Education at the University of Nijmegen. Address: Wim H. J. van Bon, Instituut voor Orthopedagiek, Universiteit van Nijmegen, Postbus 9103, 6500 HD Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Lidwien M. Boksebeld

Lidwien M. Boksebeld currently is a research associate in the same department and a school psychologist for the Oss School District.

Tonneke A.M. Font Freide

Tonneke A.M. Font Freide works as an educational psychologist in a private institution for the treatment of learning problems.

Ardine J.M. van den Hurk

Ardine J.M. van den Hurk participates in a research project on social skills training with multiply handicapped deaf children and is associated with the Orthopedagogenmaatschap Nijmegen for the treatment of learning difficulties.

This study tries to distinguish between the effects of spoken text in reading-while-listening (RwL) and those of text repetition by determining whether repeated RwL of the same text leads to better results than RwL of different texts. Moreover, it is investigated whether the results of RwL can be improved by asking the reader to detect mismatches between written and spoken texts. Subjects were 36 young backward readers (25 boys, 11 girls) from the Netherlands. Mean age was 111 months. With all three methods a practice effect was found for texts as well as for single words. Reading the same text, however, did not lead to better results than reading different texts. Nor were the effects of RwL of different texts improved by mismatch detection. Only the reading speed for the training texts increased following text repetition and mismatch detection.

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 24, No. 8, 471-476 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/002221949102400805


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. J. Therrien Fluency and Comprehension Gains as a Result of Repeated Reading: A Meta-Analysis Remedial and Special Education, August 1, 2004; 25(4): 252 - 261. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Rankhorn, G. England, S. M. Collins, J. F. Lockavitch, and B. Algozzine Effects of the failure free Reading Program on Students with Severe Reading Disabilities J Learn Disabil, May 1, 1998; 31(3): 307 - 312. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. H. Felton Effects of Instruction on the Decoding Skills of Children with Phonological-Processing Problems J Learn Disabil, November 1, 1993; 26(9): 583 - 589. [Abstract] [PDF]