Cognitive, Noncognitive, and Home Environment Correlates of Reading Difficulties in Primary-Grade Students with Language Impairment

Purpose: This article first aimed to examine the cognitive (rapid automatized naming, phonological awareness, working memory, nonverbal cognition, and language) correlates of reading difficulty in children with language impairment (LI). Second, we considered whether noncognitive (effortful control,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of speech, language, and hearing research language, and hearing research, 2020-06, Vol.63 (6), p.1933-1946
Hauptverfasser: Newbury, Jayne, Justice, Laura M, Jiang, Hui H, Schmitt, Mary Beth
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1946
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1933
container_title Journal of speech, language, and hearing research
container_volume 63
creator Newbury, Jayne
Justice, Laura M
Jiang, Hui H
Schmitt, Mary Beth
description Purpose: This article first aimed to examine the cognitive (rapid automatized naming, phonological awareness, working memory, nonverbal cognition, and language) correlates of reading difficulty in children with language impairment (LI). Second, we considered whether noncognitive (effortful control, social competence, and behavior problems) correlates offered any explanatory value above that of cognitive factors. Third, we examined whether home environment (specifically household organization and home learning environment) would offer an additional explanatory value. Method: The sample included 165 children in kindergarten and Grade 1 who were receiving intervention for LI in public schools. Standardized measures along with parent interviews/questionnaires were administered at the end of the school year. Results: Logistic regression models indicated the noncognitive factors added discriminatory value to that of cognitive factors in predicting reading difficulties, whereas household factors did not. In the final model using all 11 predictors, prediction accuracy was 88.7% for the typical reading group and 54.2% for the reading difficulty group, with an overall accuracy of 76.4%. Only phonological awareness and working memory significantly contributed to predicting reading group membership when measured in kindergarten and Grade 1. Conclusions: For this sample of children with LI, the most important predictors of reading were cognitive. The child's behavior and social competence improved prediction to a limited but statistically significant degree, whereas home environment did not. Overall classification was low, as only half of the children with reading difficulties were correctly predicted. Important factors differentiating good and poor emergent readers with LI were not captured in this study.
doi_str_mv 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00363
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2413994817</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A644464399</galeid><ericid>EJ1260653</ericid><sourcerecordid>A644464399</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-c50c17b3ff0dd6c32e7f64792387369030509f7f695aadc9dacf3ec9bf1571d03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkl1rFDEYhQdRsFZ_gQgBQbxwajLJZCaXZV27LYtKq9chTd7Mpswka5KpeO0fN-uKbWUTyMfhOYdATlW9JPiEYMbeN7jB8uJqvbqsiagxppw-qo5I2_a1ILh5XM5YNDWjff-0epbSDS6DMH5U_VqEwbvsbuEd-hS8vrspb9AqTICW_tbF4CfwGS1CjDCqDAkFiy5BGecH9MFZ6_Q8Zld059GX6CYVf9ZnURlAV3k2xZvQD5c3aK38MKsB0Pm0VS7uUp9XT6waE7z4ux9X3z4uvy5W9frz2fnidF3rlvS5rFiT7ppai43hmjbQWc460dC-o1xgilssbNFEq5TRwihtKWhxbUnbEYPpcfV2n7uN4fsMKcvJJQ3jqDyEOcmGESoE60lX0Nf_oTdhjr68rlBN21Pe3qcGNYJ03oYcld6FylPOGOOs5BWqPkAN4CGqMXiwrsgP-JMDfJkGJqcPGt7cM2xAjXmTwjhnF3x6CNI9qGNIKYKV2_1PSYLlrkjyrkiSCPmnSMX1au-C6PQ_x_KCNBzzltLf_obD7w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2425836517</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cognitive, Noncognitive, and Home Environment Correlates of Reading Difficulties in Primary-Grade Students with Language Impairment</title><source>Education Source</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Newbury, Jayne ; Justice, Laura M ; Jiang, Hui H ; Schmitt, Mary Beth</creator><creatorcontrib>Newbury, Jayne ; Justice, Laura M ; Jiang, Hui H ; Schmitt, Mary Beth</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose: This article first aimed to examine the cognitive (rapid automatized naming, phonological awareness, working memory, nonverbal cognition, and language) correlates of reading difficulty in children with language impairment (LI). Second, we considered whether noncognitive (effortful control, social competence, and behavior problems) correlates offered any explanatory value above that of cognitive factors. Third, we examined whether home environment (specifically household organization and home learning environment) would offer an additional explanatory value. Method: The sample included 165 children in kindergarten and Grade 1 who were receiving intervention for LI in public schools. Standardized measures along with parent interviews/questionnaires were administered at the end of the school year. Results: Logistic regression models indicated the noncognitive factors added discriminatory value to that of cognitive factors in predicting reading difficulties, whereas household factors did not. In the final model using all 11 predictors, prediction accuracy was 88.7% for the typical reading group and 54.2% for the reading difficulty group, with an overall accuracy of 76.4%. Only phonological awareness and working memory significantly contributed to predicting reading group membership when measured in kindergarten and Grade 1. Conclusions: For this sample of children with LI, the most important predictors of reading were cognitive. The child's behavior and social competence improved prediction to a limited but statistically significant degree, whereas home environment did not. Overall classification was low, as only half of the children with reading difficulties were correctly predicted. Important factors differentiating good and poor emergent readers with LI were not captured in this study.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1092-4388</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1558-9102</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00363</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Rockville: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association</publisher><subject>Abnormalities ; Accuracy ; Behavior Problems ; Child Behavior ; Children &amp; youth ; Classification ; Cognition ; Cognition &amp; reasoning ; Comorbidity ; Comparative analysis ; Correlation ; Diagnosis ; Discussion groups ; Dyslexia ; Educational Environment ; Elementary School Students ; Emergent Literacy ; Family Environment ; Grade 1 ; Grade 2 ; Home ; Influence ; Interpersonal Competence ; Intervention ; Kindergarten ; Language disorders ; Language Impairments ; Language Skills ; Language thought relationship ; Learning environment ; Measures (Individuals) ; Memory ; Naming ; Native Language ; Nonverbal Ability ; Parent Attitudes ; Phonological Awareness ; Phonology ; Poverty ; Prediction ; Primary Education ; Psychological aspects ; Public Schools ; Reading Ability ; Reading comprehension ; Reading Difficulties ; Reading disabilities ; Reading disability ; Reading instruction ; Reading Skills ; Schemata (Cognition) ; School environment ; Short Term Memory ; Social factors ; Social skills ; Specific language impairment</subject><ispartof>Journal of speech, language, and hearing research, 2020-06, Vol.63 (6), p.1933-1946</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2020 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Jun 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-c50c17b3ff0dd6c32e7f64792387369030509f7f695aadc9dacf3ec9bf1571d03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-c50c17b3ff0dd6c32e7f64792387369030509f7f695aadc9dacf3ec9bf1571d03</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0580-0280 ; 0000-0003-0615-3959 ; 0000-0003-1731-9504</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1260653$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Newbury, Jayne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Justice, Laura M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Hui H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmitt, Mary Beth</creatorcontrib><title>Cognitive, Noncognitive, and Home Environment Correlates of Reading Difficulties in Primary-Grade Students with Language Impairment</title><title>Journal of speech, language, and hearing research</title><description>Purpose: This article first aimed to examine the cognitive (rapid automatized naming, phonological awareness, working memory, nonverbal cognition, and language) correlates of reading difficulty in children with language impairment (LI). Second, we considered whether noncognitive (effortful control, social competence, and behavior problems) correlates offered any explanatory value above that of cognitive factors. Third, we examined whether home environment (specifically household organization and home learning environment) would offer an additional explanatory value. Method: The sample included 165 children in kindergarten and Grade 1 who were receiving intervention for LI in public schools. Standardized measures along with parent interviews/questionnaires were administered at the end of the school year. Results: Logistic regression models indicated the noncognitive factors added discriminatory value to that of cognitive factors in predicting reading difficulties, whereas household factors did not. In the final model using all 11 predictors, prediction accuracy was 88.7% for the typical reading group and 54.2% for the reading difficulty group, with an overall accuracy of 76.4%. Only phonological awareness and working memory significantly contributed to predicting reading group membership when measured in kindergarten and Grade 1. Conclusions: For this sample of children with LI, the most important predictors of reading were cognitive. The child's behavior and social competence improved prediction to a limited but statistically significant degree, whereas home environment did not. Overall classification was low, as only half of the children with reading difficulties were correctly predicted. Important factors differentiating good and poor emergent readers with LI were not captured in this study.</description><subject>Abnormalities</subject><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Behavior Problems</subject><subject>Child Behavior</subject><subject>Children &amp; youth</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Discussion groups</subject><subject>Dyslexia</subject><subject>Educational Environment</subject><subject>Elementary School Students</subject><subject>Emergent Literacy</subject><subject>Family Environment</subject><subject>Grade 1</subject><subject>Grade 2</subject><subject>Home</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Interpersonal Competence</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Kindergarten</subject><subject>Language disorders</subject><subject>Language Impairments</subject><subject>Language Skills</subject><subject>Language thought relationship</subject><subject>Learning environment</subject><subject>Measures (Individuals)</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Naming</subject><subject>Native Language</subject><subject>Nonverbal Ability</subject><subject>Parent Attitudes</subject><subject>Phonological Awareness</subject><subject>Phonology</subject><subject>Poverty</subject><subject>Prediction</subject><subject>Primary Education</subject><subject>Psychological aspects</subject><subject>Public Schools</subject><subject>Reading Ability</subject><subject>Reading comprehension</subject><subject>Reading Difficulties</subject><subject>Reading disabilities</subject><subject>Reading disability</subject><subject>Reading instruction</subject><subject>Reading Skills</subject><subject>Schemata (Cognition)</subject><subject>School environment</subject><subject>Short Term Memory</subject><subject>Social factors</subject><subject>Social skills</subject><subject>Specific language impairment</subject><issn>1092-4388</issn><issn>1558-9102</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNptkl1rFDEYhQdRsFZ_gQgBQbxwajLJZCaXZV27LYtKq9chTd7Mpswka5KpeO0fN-uKbWUTyMfhOYdATlW9JPiEYMbeN7jB8uJqvbqsiagxppw-qo5I2_a1ILh5XM5YNDWjff-0epbSDS6DMH5U_VqEwbvsbuEd-hS8vrspb9AqTICW_tbF4CfwGS1CjDCqDAkFiy5BGecH9MFZ6_Q8Zld059GX6CYVf9ZnURlAV3k2xZvQD5c3aK38MKsB0Pm0VS7uUp9XT6waE7z4ux9X3z4uvy5W9frz2fnidF3rlvS5rFiT7ppai43hmjbQWc460dC-o1xgilssbNFEq5TRwihtKWhxbUnbEYPpcfV2n7uN4fsMKcvJJQ3jqDyEOcmGESoE60lX0Nf_oTdhjr68rlBN21Pe3qcGNYJ03oYcld6FylPOGOOs5BWqPkAN4CGqMXiwrsgP-JMDfJkGJqcPGt7cM2xAjXmTwjhnF3x6CNI9qGNIKYKV2_1PSYLlrkjyrkiSCPmnSMX1au-C6PQ_x_KCNBzzltLf_obD7w</recordid><startdate>20200601</startdate><enddate>20200601</enddate><creator>Newbury, Jayne</creator><creator>Justice, Laura M</creator><creator>Jiang, Hui H</creator><creator>Schmitt, Mary Beth</creator><general>American Speech-Language-Hearing Association</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0580-0280</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0615-3959</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1731-9504</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200601</creationdate><title>Cognitive, Noncognitive, and Home Environment Correlates of Reading Difficulties in Primary-Grade Students with Language Impairment</title><author>Newbury, Jayne ; Justice, Laura M ; Jiang, Hui H ; Schmitt, Mary Beth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-c50c17b3ff0dd6c32e7f64792387369030509f7f695aadc9dacf3ec9bf1571d03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Abnormalities</topic><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Behavior Problems</topic><topic>Child Behavior</topic><topic>Children &amp; youth</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Cognition &amp; reasoning</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Discussion groups</topic><topic>Dyslexia</topic><topic>Educational Environment</topic><topic>Elementary School Students</topic><topic>Emergent Literacy</topic><topic>Family Environment</topic><topic>Grade 1</topic><topic>Grade 2</topic><topic>Home</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Interpersonal Competence</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Kindergarten</topic><topic>Language disorders</topic><topic>Language Impairments</topic><topic>Language Skills</topic><topic>Language thought relationship</topic><topic>Learning environment</topic><topic>Measures (Individuals)</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Naming</topic><topic>Native Language</topic><topic>Nonverbal Ability</topic><topic>Parent Attitudes</topic><topic>Phonological Awareness</topic><topic>Phonology</topic><topic>Poverty</topic><topic>Prediction</topic><topic>Primary Education</topic><topic>Psychological aspects</topic><topic>Public Schools</topic><topic>Reading Ability</topic><topic>Reading comprehension</topic><topic>Reading Difficulties</topic><topic>Reading disabilities</topic><topic>Reading disability</topic><topic>Reading instruction</topic><topic>Reading Skills</topic><topic>Schemata (Cognition)</topic><topic>School environment</topic><topic>Short Term Memory</topic><topic>Social factors</topic><topic>Social skills</topic><topic>Specific language impairment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Newbury, Jayne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Justice, Laura M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Hui H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmitt, Mary Beth</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of speech, language, and hearing research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Newbury, Jayne</au><au>Justice, Laura M</au><au>Jiang, Hui H</au><au>Schmitt, Mary Beth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1260653</ericid><atitle>Cognitive, Noncognitive, and Home Environment Correlates of Reading Difficulties in Primary-Grade Students with Language Impairment</atitle><jtitle>Journal of speech, language, and hearing research</jtitle><date>2020-06-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>63</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1933</spage><epage>1946</epage><pages>1933-1946</pages><issn>1092-4388</issn><eissn>1558-9102</eissn><abstract>Purpose: This article first aimed to examine the cognitive (rapid automatized naming, phonological awareness, working memory, nonverbal cognition, and language) correlates of reading difficulty in children with language impairment (LI). Second, we considered whether noncognitive (effortful control, social competence, and behavior problems) correlates offered any explanatory value above that of cognitive factors. Third, we examined whether home environment (specifically household organization and home learning environment) would offer an additional explanatory value. Method: The sample included 165 children in kindergarten and Grade 1 who were receiving intervention for LI in public schools. Standardized measures along with parent interviews/questionnaires were administered at the end of the school year. Results: Logistic regression models indicated the noncognitive factors added discriminatory value to that of cognitive factors in predicting reading difficulties, whereas household factors did not. In the final model using all 11 predictors, prediction accuracy was 88.7% for the typical reading group and 54.2% for the reading difficulty group, with an overall accuracy of 76.4%. Only phonological awareness and working memory significantly contributed to predicting reading group membership when measured in kindergarten and Grade 1. Conclusions: For this sample of children with LI, the most important predictors of reading were cognitive. The child's behavior and social competence improved prediction to a limited but statistically significant degree, whereas home environment did not. Overall classification was low, as only half of the children with reading difficulties were correctly predicted. Important factors differentiating good and poor emergent readers with LI were not captured in this study.</abstract><cop>Rockville</cop><pub>American Speech-Language-Hearing Association</pub><doi>10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00363</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0580-0280</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0615-3959</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1731-9504</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1092-4388
ispartof Journal of speech, language, and hearing research, 2020-06, Vol.63 (6), p.1933-1946
issn 1092-4388
1558-9102
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2413994817
source Education Source; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Abnormalities
Accuracy
Behavior Problems
Child Behavior
Children & youth
Classification
Cognition
Cognition & reasoning
Comorbidity
Comparative analysis
Correlation
Diagnosis
Discussion groups
Dyslexia
Educational Environment
Elementary School Students
Emergent Literacy
Family Environment
Grade 1
Grade 2
Home
Influence
Interpersonal Competence
Intervention
Kindergarten
Language disorders
Language Impairments
Language Skills
Language thought relationship
Learning environment
Measures (Individuals)
Memory
Naming
Native Language
Nonverbal Ability
Parent Attitudes
Phonological Awareness
Phonology
Poverty
Prediction
Primary Education
Psychological aspects
Public Schools
Reading Ability
Reading comprehension
Reading Difficulties
Reading disabilities
Reading disability
Reading instruction
Reading Skills
Schemata (Cognition)
School environment
Short Term Memory
Social factors
Social skills
Specific language impairment
title Cognitive, Noncognitive, and Home Environment Correlates of Reading Difficulties in Primary-Grade Students with Language Impairment
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T06%3A29%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cognitive,%20Noncognitive,%20and%20Home%20Environment%20Correlates%20of%20Reading%20Difficulties%20in%20Primary-Grade%20Students%20with%20Language%20Impairment&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20speech,%20language,%20and%20hearing%20research&rft.au=Newbury,%20Jayne&rft.date=2020-06-01&rft.volume=63&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1933&rft.epage=1946&rft.pages=1933-1946&rft.issn=1092-4388&rft.eissn=1558-9102&rft_id=info:doi/10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00363&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA644464399%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2425836517&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A644464399&rft_ericid=EJ1260653&rfr_iscdi=true