Validation of the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension In grades 7 through 12
Validation of the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension In grades 7 through 12
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.02.002
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-01
影响因子：
10.3
通讯作者：
Kulesz, Paulina
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ahmed, Yusra;Francis, David J.;Kulesz, Paulina
本研究在大量（n = 1196）和多样化（7-12 年级）样本中评估了阅读理解的直接和推理中介 (DIME) 模型（Cromley & Azevedo，2007）。多指标潜在变量用于测量六个主要结构：知识、词汇、单词阅读、策略、推理和阅读理解。当使用类似方法时，结果证实了先前的研究，但当预测变量和阅读理解结果之间的测量误差和共享方法方差（方法偏差）得到控制时，结果与先前的发现背道而驰。结果概括了整个初中和高中，阅读的组成部分技能几乎解释了阅读理解的所有系统差异。重要的是，控制方法偏差降低了知识和词汇的重要性，并增加了推理的重要性。还发现了知识和词汇通过推理产生的中介效应。本研究提供了比之前的研究更强大、更通用的 DIME 模型表述，并强调了在阅读理解的组成技能模型中使用基于阅读的预测变量的局限性。 (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. 保留所有权利。
This study evaluated the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension (Cromley & Azevedo, 2007) in a large (n = 1196) and diverse (grades 7-12) sample. Multi-indicator latent variables were used to measure six primary constructs: knowledge, vocabulary, word reading, strategies, inference, and reading comprehension. Results corroborated prior research when similar methods were used, but departed from prior findings when measurement error and shared method variance between the predictors and the reading comprehension outcomes (method bias) were controlled. Results generalized across middle and high school, and component skills of reading accounted for virtually all of the systematic variance in reading comprehension. Importantly, controlling method bias diminished the importance of knowledge and vocabulary, and increased the importance of inferencing. Mediated effects of knowledge and vocabulary through inference making were also found. The present study provided a stronger and more generalizable formulation of the DIME model than prior research, and highlighted limitations of using reading-based measures of predictors in component skills models of reading comprehension. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.