Differential Contributions of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge to Reading Comprehension in Chinese Children With and Without Developmental Dyslexia

Differential Contributions of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge to Reading Comprehension in Chinese Children With and Without Developmental Dyslexia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Differential Contributions of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge to Reading Comprehension in Chinese Children With and Without Developmental Dyslexia Liuxin Chen, Jialei Wang, Jun Wang, Yajing Zhang This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7278840/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Reading is a foundational skill essential for academic achievement and lifelong learning, and primary school is a critical period for its development. Reading comprehension, as the ultimate goal of reading, depends on language-related cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge. However, how these components interact—and whether their contributions differ between typically developing children and those with developmental dyslexia (DD)—remains unclear. This study examined 111 Chinese children with DD and 111 age-matched typically developing children (CA group), identified using an ability–achievement discrepancy model. Cognitive-linguistic skills (phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and rapid automatized naming), vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension were assessed. Group comparisons were conducted, and hierarchical regression and structural equation modeling were used to explore the direct and indirect pathways contributing to reading comprehension. Results revealed that children with DD performed significantly worse than their CA peers in all measured domains. For typically developing children, cognitive-linguistic skills contributed to reading comprehension indirectly through vocabulary knowledge and reading fluency. In contrast, among children with DD, morphological awareness had both direct and indirect effects on reading comprehension. These findings suggest that while language-related cognitive skills and vocabulary knowledge are important for reading development in all children, the underlying mechanisms differ. Reading comprehension in typically developing children relies more on vocabulary knowledge and fluency, whereas children with DD depend more directly on morphological processing. These insights have practical implications for designing targeted reading interventions for Chinese children with reading difficulties. developmental dyslexia cognitive-linguistic skills vocabulary knowledge reading comprehension Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 1 Introduction 1.1 Importance of Reading and Theoretical Framework Reading is a foundational skill essential for knowledge acquisition, academic success, and lifelong learning. Among its subcomponents, reading comprehension—the ability to extract and construct meaning from written text—represents the ultimate goal of reading development. The Simple View of Reading (SVR; Hoover & Gough, 1990 ) posits that reading comprehension is determined by two relatively independent components: decoding and linguistic comprehension. While decoding in alphabetic languages typically involves grapheme–phoneme correspondence, in logographic scripts such as Chinese, it is more accurately conceptualized as word recognition (Joshi et al., 2012 ). Within this framework, cognitive-linguistic skills such as phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and rapid automatized naming are considered critical for decoding, while vocabulary knowledge primarily supports linguistic comprehension (Duff et al., 2015 ; Perfetti & Stafura, 2014 ). These language-related abilities are distinct from domain-general cognitive skills and have been consistently identified as core predictors of reading development (Cain & Oakhill, 2014 ; Nation & Snowling, 1997 ). Recent advances in reading comprehension research have increasingly underscored the developmental heterogeneity of reading profiles, highlighting that poor comprehension can arise through diverse cognitive-linguistic pathways depending on individual risk and trajectory (James et al., 2023 ; Solari et al., 2018 ). This complexity has not been adequately explored in research on Chinese developmental dyslexia. Theoretical models of dyslexia have also highlighted underlying processing deficits. For example, auditory-based theories emphasize impairments in temporal auditory processing (Ramus, 2003 ), while visual-based theories point to reduced visual attention span (Stein, 2019 ). These perspectives are supported by neuroimaging findings, such as EEG studies, which show atypical neural responses to speech and print stimuli in individuals with dyslexia (Goswami, 2011 ), reinforcing the multifactorial and neurobiological basis of reading difficulties. 1.2 Developmental Dyslexia and Its Underlying Mechanisms Developmental dyslexia (DD) is a specific learning disorder characterized by persistent difficulties in word-level reading despite adequate intelligence and educational exposure (Lyon et al., 2003 ). In Chinese, DD manifests differently from alphabetic languages due to the unique orthographic, phonological, and morphological properties of the writing system. Although DD is widely recognized as a neurodevelopmental disorder with genetic, neural, and environmental origins (Pennington, 2006 ), cognitive-linguistic factors are central to its behavioral expression. Language-specific impairments—especially in phonological processing—are widely regarded as core deficits in dyslexia (Snowling & Hulme, 2012 ). Vocabulary knowledge is also often found to be limited in children with DD, potentially compounding their reading difficulties. However, vocabulary deficits are typically considered consequences or co-occurring symptoms rather than primary causes (Bishop & Snowling, 2004 ). In line with this view, the current study focuses on cognitive-linguistic skills—phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and rapid automatized naming—and vocabulary knowledge as key components of reading development. These skills have been shown to be impaired in children with DD and are particularly relevant for understanding individual differences in reading comprehension (Scarborough, 1990 ). Although this study centers on reading-related abilities, we acknowledge the importance of distinguishing DD from comorbid conditions such as developmental language disorder (DLD), which may present overlapping symptoms. While we did not formally assess DLD in the current sample, future work should incorporate screening procedures to examine comorbidity and refine diagnostic clarity. 1.3 Cognitive-Linguistic Skills in Chinese Reading In Chinese, phonological awareness plays a role in early reading development but is relatively less predictive of reading outcomes compared to alphabetic languages, due to the limited grapheme–phoneme correspondence (Ho et al., 2000 ). In contrast, morphological awareness is particularly important given the morpheme-based structure of Chinese characters and the prevalence of compound words (Shu et al., 2006 ; Lee et al., 2006 ). Prior studies have consistently demonstrated that morphological awareness predicts both reading fluency and comprehension among Chinese-speaking children (Cheng et al., 2016 ; Qiao et al., 2021 ). Rapid automatized naming (RAN) is another well-established predictor of reading ability. RAN reflects the efficiency of accessing and retrieving phonological and semantic information and is considered an indicator of processing speed and lexical access (Lin et al., 2020 ). Vocabulary knowledge, reflecting the breadth and depth of lexical representations, is essential for both listening and reading comprehension (Kuo & Anderson, 2006 ; Song et al., 2015 ). Although vocabulary development has been extensively examined in typically developing children and second-language learners, relatively little is known about its role in Chinese children with dyslexia. Given that poor vocabulary knowledge may constrain higher-level text processing and integration, this gap warrants further investigation. Recent research has highlighted the mediating role of vocabulary and morphological awareness in reading comprehension, particularly in orthographically complex languages such as Chinese (Li & Wu, 2015 ; Zhao et al., 2019 ). 1.4 Research Gaps and Rationale for the Study Despite extensive research on the cognitive and linguistic profiles of children with DD, the interplay between cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge—and their differential contributions to reading comprehension in children with and without DD—remains insufficiently explored in Chinese-speaking populations. Moreover, few studies have examined how these relationships may change with age or educational stage. For instance, phonological awareness tends to stabilize in earlier grades, while morphological awareness continues to develop (Yeung et al., 2014 ). These developmental trajectories have rarely been controlled for or directly addressed in prior group comparisons. Calls for more nuanced understanding of individual differences in reading pathways and their developmental course have grown in recent years (James et al., 2023 ; Solari et al., 2018 ). However, such perspectives are still underrepresented in research on Chinese developmental dyslexia. 1.5 Research Objectives and Hypotheses This study investigates how cognitive-linguistic skills (phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and rapid automatized naming) and vocabulary knowledge contribute to reading comprehension in Chinese children with and without developmental dyslexia. Specifically, we aim to determine whether the predictive mechanisms differ across these two groups. Based on existing theoretical and empirical literature, we formulated the following hypotheses: Hypothesis 1 Children with DD will perform significantly worse than typically developing children on measures of cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, and reading comprehension. Hypothesis 2 Cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge will predict reading comprehension in both groups, but the strength and pathways of these effects will differ between children with and without DD. 1.6 Significance of the Study This study contributes to the growing body of research on reading development by examining how cognitive-linguistic and vocabulary factors jointly influence reading comprehension in Chinese children. By extending the application of the Simple View of Reading to a non-alphabetic context, it enhances our understanding of reading mechanisms across writing systems. The findings also offer practical implications for educational interventions, suggesting the need for tailored approaches that address the distinct reading profiles of children with developmental dyslexia. Furthermore, this study responds to calls in the literature for more sophisticated models of reading that account for developmental and cross-linguistic variation (Cain, 2016 ; Nation, 2019 ). 2 Material and Methods 2.1 Participants A total of 980 students from Grades 2, 4, and 6 at a primary school in Hebei Province, China, were administered the Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices (Zhang & Wang, 1985 ) to assess nonverbal intelligence, and a standardized literacy scale to evaluate reading achievement (Li et al., 2012 ). Based on the ability–achievement discrepancy model, 111 children were identified as having developmental dyslexia (DD). The dyslexic group consisted of 41 second graders (21 boys), 43 fourth graders (24 boys), and 27 sixth graders (17 boys). To form a matched control group, 111 typically developing children were selected from the same school, matched by age and grade level. The control (CA) group included 43 second graders (22 boys), 39 fourth graders (21 boys), and 29 sixth graders (15 boys). This yielded a total sample of 222 participants. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Hebei Normal University, and all procedures conformed to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from the parents or legal guardians of all participating children, as well as from their classroom teachers. Table 1 presents a comparative analysis of age and literacy scores between the DD and CA groups. No significant differences in age were found between the groups across grades (p > .05), indicating appropriate group matching. However, children in the DD group scored significantly lower than their typically developing peers on the literacy test (p < .001), confirming the validity of the screening criteria. These results indicate that the selected sample meets the criteria of the ability–achievement discrepancy model and is appropriate for subsequent analyses. Table 1 Comparison of differences between CA and DD group in screening tests scores (M ± SD) Variable CA group DD group t Age (year) 9.56 ± 1.29 9.53 ± 1.30 0.16 Raven 38.59 ± 6.92 37.19 ± 6.03 1.61 Literacy (words) 97.85 ± 35.66 68.72 ± 37.01 5.97 *** Note. *** p < 0.001. 2.2 Measures This study assessed participants’ cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. The cognitive-linguistic components included phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming (RAN), and morphological awareness. All tasks were administered individually in a quiet classroom setting by trained graduate students. The details of each measure are provided below. 2.2.1 Phonological Awareness Phonological awareness was measured using a phoneme deletion task (Lei et al., 2011 ). The task included 4 practice items and 12 test items. Each item consisted of an orally presented syllable (e.g., /zuo3/), and the child was asked to delete a specified phoneme (e.g., /o/) and pronounce the remaining syllable. One point was awarded for each correct response, with a maximum score of 12. 2.2.2 Rapid Automatized Naming Rapid naming ability was assessed using a Rapid Automatized Naming of Numbers task (Lei et al., 2011 ). A 5×5 matrix containing five digits (e.g., 2, 4, 6, 7, 9), each repeated five times in random order, was presented. Children were instructed to name the numbers as quickly and accurately as possible. The total time (in seconds) taken to complete the task was recorded. Faster times indicate better performance. 2.2.3 Morphological Awareness Morphological awareness was assessed using three tasks: Homophonic Morphological Awareness: In this task, adapted from Shu et al. ( 2006 ), the experimenter orally presented a word (e.g., 石头, ‘stone’) and highlighted a morpheme (e.g., 石). The child was then asked to generate as many different words as possible that share the same pronunciation as the target morpheme (e.g., 时间 ‘time’, 十个 ‘ten’, 认识 ‘recognize’). There were 12 items, with a 30-second time limit per item. One point was awarded for each correct word produced. There was no upper limit to the total score. Homographic Morphological Awareness (Li et al., 2009 ): Children were orally presented with two-character words (e.g., 面条 ‘noodles’), with one morpheme (e.g., 面) specified as the target. They were required to produce two new words: one with the same meaning as the target morpheme (e.g., 面粉 ‘flour’) and one with a different meaning (e.g., 里面 ‘inside’). One point was awarded per correct response. The task included 12 items, with a maximum score of 24 points. Compound Morphological Awareness: This task required children to generate novel compound words based on brief semantic prompts describing invented objects or concepts. For example, for the prompt “What do you call a basket made of paper?” (用纸编的篮子叫什么?), the correct answer would be 纸篮 (paper basket). There were 12 items, and responses were rated on a 0–2 point scale for semantic appropriateness and morphological structure, yielding a maximum score of 24. 2.2.4 Vocabulary Knowledge Vocabulary knowledge was assessed using a vocabulary definition task (Liu & McBride-Chang, 2010 ), which included 32 words ranging from easy to difficult. Children were asked to provide definitions for orally presented words. Responses were scored based on the number of semantic features provided. A definition that correctly included both categorical and defining characteristics received 2 points, a partially correct response received 1 point, and irrelevant or repeated responses scored 0. For example, for 厨房 (kitchen), a response such as “a place for cooking” received 2 points, while “a place in the house” received 1 point. The task was discontinued if a child scored 0 on five consecutive items. The maximum score was 64 points. 2.2.5 Reading Fluency Reading fluency was assessed using a three-minute sentence verification task (Pan et al., 2011 ), consisting of 100 sentences of increasing length. Children were asked to read the sentences silently and judge whether each one was semantically correct (e.g., 天安门在北京, ‘Tiananmen is in Beijing’ – correct). Within a three-minute time limit, they marked each sentence as true or false. The final fluency score was calculated as the total number of characters in correctly answered items minus the number of characters in incorrectly answered items. 2.2.6 Reading Comprehension Reading comprehension was assessed using grade-appropriate tasks selected from a standardized and widely used Chinese reading comprehension test (Wen, 2005 ), which has demonstrated strong reliability and has been extensively applied in previous studies (Cheng et al., 2018 ; Xie et al., 2019 ). Separate texts and questions were used for Grades 2, 4, and 6 to reflect developmental differences in reading abilities. Each task consisted of a narrative passage followed by multiple-choice and one open-ended question. For example, the Grade 2 passage (Beautiful Flower Garden) contained 329 characters and was followed by 7 multiple-choice items and 1 open-ended question; Grade 4 (The Big Rooster), 393 characters and 10 questions; Grade 6 (In the Vegetable Garden), 706 characters and 15 questions. The multiple-choice items primarily assessed the ability to locate and recall key information, draw simple inferences, and integrate content—cognitive processes essential to reading comprehension. The open-ended question required children to summarize or explain key aspects of the text in their own words, thereby assessing the construction of a coherent mental representation. Answers were scored on a 3-point scale based on accuracy and completeness. Total reading comprehension scores were calculated by summing the scores from both item types. This assessment approach reflects the core processes of reading comprehension: identifying key information, maintaining it in working memory, and integrating it into long-term understanding. 2.3 Procedure Children with developmental dyslexia (DD) and age-matched typically developing controls (CA) were first identified through the administration of the Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices and the Literacy Scale Test. Only those meeting the criteria based on the ability–achievement discrepancy model were included in the subsequent testing phase. All participants completed the full battery of assessments described in Section 2.2 , including tasks measuring phonological awareness, rapid automatized, naming, morphological awareness, vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. To derive a composite score for morphological awareness, raw scores from the three subtests (homophonic, homographic, and compound morphological tasks) were standardized (z-scores) and then averaged. This approach ensured that each component contributed equally to the overall morphological awareness index. All data were analyzed using SPSS version 26.0 for descriptive statistics and group comparisons, and AMOS version 24.0 was used for structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the hypothesized relationships among cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, and reading comprehension. 3 Results 3.1 Group Differences in Cognitive-Linguistic Skills, Vocabulary Knowledge, and Reading Performance Independent samples t-tests were conducted to compare the performance of children with developmental dyslexia (DD) and their typically developing peers (CA group) across key variables (see Table 2 ). Results indicated that children in the DD group scored significantly lower than those in the CA group on measures of cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension ( p s < .001). Table 2 Comparison of differences between CA and DD group in all variables scores (M ± SD) Variable CA group DD group t Phonological awareness 9.52 ± 2.17 7.27 ± 2.41 7.31 *** Rapid automatized naming 22.22 ± 5.91 27.23 ± 6.77 -5.87 *** Morphological awareness 52.48 ± 10.67 36.21 ± 11.88 10.73 *** Vocabulary knowledge 28.68 ± 10.27 18.55 ± 7.97 8.21 *** Reading fluency 1116.34 ± 683.11 317.37 ± 172.34 11.95 *** Reading comprehension 7.59 ± 2.76 5.11 ± 2.06 7.61 *** Note. *** p < 0.001. 3.2 Correlation Analysis Between Cognitive-Linguistic Skills, Vocabulary Knowledge, and Reading Comprehension in CA and DD Groups Spearman correlation analyses were conducted separately for the CA and DD groups to examine the relationships among cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, and reading comprehension (see Table 3 ). Results revealed that rapid automatized naming was significantly negatively correlated with all other variables, while significant positive correlations were found among the remaining variables across both groups. Table 3 Correlation analysis between various variables in CA children (bottom left) and DD children (top right) Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 Phonological awareness -0.42 * 0.55 * 0.50 * 0.61 * 0.40 * 2 Rapid automatized naming -0.57 * -0.53 * -0.61 * -0.72 * -0.45 * 3 Morphological awareness 0.66 * -0.76 * 0.78 * 0.79 * 0.74 * 4 Vocabulary knowledge 0.66 * -0.79 * 0.82 * 0.85 * 0.72 * 5 Reading fluency 0.63 * -0.85 * 0.80 * 0.86 * 0.71 * 6 Reading comprehension 0.57 * -0.72 * 0.73 * 0.81 * 0.82 * Note. Using the Bonferroni-corrected/adjusted p value for correlations, the Bonferrioni corrected p is 0.05/5 = 0.01, * signifies p < 0.01. 3.3 Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge on Reading Comprehension in CA and DD Groups To examine the unique contributions of cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge to reading comprehension, a hierarchical regression analysis was performed separately for the CA and DD groups, controlling for age and intelligence. Reading comprehension served as the dependent variable. The results are summarized in Table 4 . Table 4 Hierarchical regression analysis of cognitive skills and vocabulary knowledge on reading comprehension in CA and DD children Group Dependent variable Step Predictive variables R 2 ΔR 2 ΔF β t CA RC 1 Age 0.566 0.566 70.433 0.743 11.254 *** Raven 0.03 0.454 2 PA 0.659 0.093 9.604 0.041 0.536 RAN -0.174 -1.849 MA 0.269 2.774 ** 3 VK 0.698 0.039 13.439 0.358 3.666 *** 2 VK 0.691 0.125 43.219 0.461 6.574 *** 3 PA 0.698 0.008 0.868 -0.006 -0.081 RAN -0.085 -0.92 MA 0.1 0.981 DD RC 1 Age 0.192 0.192 12.827 0.414 4.258 *** Raven 0.048 0.492 2 PA 0.515 0.323 23.313 0.012 0.143 RAN -0.019 -0.21 MA 0.684 7.397 *** 3 VK 0.579 0.064 15.731 0.473 3.966 *** 2 VK 0.542 0.35 81.709 0.728 9.039 *** 3 PA 0.579 0.037 3.036 0.016 0.201 RAN 0.034 0.402 MA 0.35 2.889 ** Note. PA = phonological awareness; RAN = rapid automatized naming; MA = morphological awareness; VK = vocabulary knowledge; RC = reading comprehension. ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. In the CA group, when cognitive-linguistic skills were entered in the second step and vocabulary knowledge in the third, cognitive-linguistic skills accounted for 9.3% of the variance in reading comprehension, while vocabulary knowledge accounted for 3.9%. Only morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge showed significant predictive effects on reading comprehension. Conversely, when vocabulary knowledge was entered in the second step and cognitive-linguistic skills in the third, vocabulary knowledge explained 12.5% of the variance, whereas cognitive-linguistic skills accounted for only 0.8%. These findings suggest that vocabulary knowledge has a comparatively greater influence on reading comprehension in typically developing Chinese children than cognitive-linguistic skills. In the DD group, with cognitive-linguistic skills entered at the second step and vocabulary knowledge at the third, cognitive-linguistic skills explained 32.3% of the variance in reading comprehension, and vocabulary knowledge explained 6.4%. Morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge were significant predictors. When vocabulary knowledge was entered at the second step and cognitive-linguistic skills at the third, vocabulary knowledge accounted for 35% of the variance, and cognitive-linguistic skills explained 3.7%. Both morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge significantly predicted reading comprehension. These results indicate that while vocabulary knowledge exerts a strong influence on reading comprehension in children with DD, cognitive-linguistic skills also play a more prominent role compared to typically developing children. Overall, the results suggest that reading comprehension in typically developing children mainly depends on vocabulary knowledge, whereas in children with DD, it relies not only on vocabulary knowledge but also requires greater involvement of cognitive-linguistic skills. 3.4 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) of the Relationship Among Cognitive-Linguistic Skills, Vocabulary Knowledge, and Reading Comprehension in CA and DD Children To further examine the mechanisms through which cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge contribute to reading comprehension in typically developing (CA) and developmentally dyslexic (DD) children, separate structural equation models were constructed for each group using AMOS 24.0. These models allowed us to compare the pathways and strengths of relationships between key variables across the two populations. Importantly, grade level and nonverbal intelligence (Raven’s scores) were statistically controlled in both models to account for potential confounding effects. However, to maintain model parsimony and clarity, these control variables were not visually represented in the SEM diagrams. The SEM for the CA group demonstrated good fit indices: χ 2 /df = 1.21, p = 0.30;, RMSEA = 0.04, SRMR = 0.03, GFI = 0.98, TLI = 1.00, CFI = 1.00. The model is illustrated in Fig. 1 . Significant correlations were observed among phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and morphological awareness ( r pr =-0.57, p < 0.001; r pm =0.65, p < 0.001; r RM =-0.74, p < 0.001). Phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and morphological awareness signigicantly predicted vocabulary knowledge( β PV = 0.14, p < 0.05; β RV =-0.29, p < 0.001; β MV = 0.49, p < 0.001). Vocabulary knowledge and rapid automatized naming also had significant effects on reading fluency༈ β VF = 0.52, p < 0.001; β RF =-0.39, p < 0.001). Finally, reading fluency had a strong positive effect on reading comprehension༈ β FC = 0.86, p < 0.001). The SEM model for children with DD demonstrated an acceptable fit: χ 2 /df = 2.42, p = 0.05; RMSEA = 0.11, SRMR = 0.03, GFI = 0.97, TLI = 0.95, CFI = 0.99. The model is depicted in Fig. 2 . Significant correlations were found among phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and morphological awareness ( r PR =-0.45, p < 0.001; r PM =0.52, p < 0.001; r RM =-0.55, p < 0.001). Furthermore, rapid automatized naming and morphological awareness significantly predicted vocabulary knowledge( β RV =-0.17, p < 0.01; β MV = 0.72, p < 0.001). Phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, morphological awareness, and vocabulary knowledge all had significant effects on reading fluency༈ β PF = 0.19, p < 0.001; β RF =-0.18, p < 0.01; β MF = 0.21, p < 0.05; β VF = 0.45, p < 0.001༉. Moreover, morphological awareness and reading fluency significantly influenced reading comprehension༈ β MC = 0.31, p < 0.01; β FC = 0.51, p < 0.001༉. Comparing the SEM pathways of typically developing (CA) and children with developmental dyslexia (DD), notable differences emerge in the effects of phonological awareness and morphological awareness on reading comprehension. In the CA group, phonological awareness and morphological awareness influenced reading fluency entirely through vocabulary knowledge, indicating a full mediation effect. In contrast, among children with DD, phonological awareness had a direct effect on reading fluency. Morphological awareness not only influenced reading fluency indirectly via vocabulary knowledge but also exerted direct effects on both reading fluency and reading comprehension. Thus, vocabulary knowledge played a partial mediating role in the relationship between cognitive-linguistic skills and reading outcomes in children with DD. 3.5 Scatter Plots of Individual Test Scores for DD and CA Groups Based on the scatter plot results, it can be inferred that the distributions of the two groups of children are similar across all test. However, overall, the DD group trails behind the CA group in all test. 4. Discussion 4.1 Deficits in Cognitive-Linguistic Skills, Vocabulary Knowledge, and Reading Comprehension in Children with DD This study found that children with developmental dyslexia (DD) performed significantly worse than their typically developing (TD) peers across a range of cognitive-linguistic skills—specifically phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming (RAN), and morphological awareness—as well as vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension. These results align with prior research on Chinese-speaking children with DD, which has consistently documented impairments in these domains (Ho et al., 2000 ; Kalindi & Chung, 2018 ; Lin et al., 2020 ). Notably, deficits in morphological awareness appear particularly pronounced in Chinese readers (Shu et al., 2006 ; Wu et al., 2005 ). Phonological awareness deficits can hinder the acquisition of accurate grapheme–phoneme correspondences, impeding early decoding (Swan & Goswami, 1997 ). Impairments in RAN reflect reduced efficiency in accessing phonological representations from visual input, which can compromise reading fluency and downstream comprehension (Moll et al., 2014 ; Zhang et al., 2017 ). Additionally, consistent with the views of Nation ( 2019 ) and Cain ( 2016 ), our findings confirm that vocabulary knowledge is central to the construction of coherent mental representations of text. Limited lexical-semantic knowledge constrains inference generation and semantic integration, two critical processes in reading comprehension. Thus, the co-occurrence of deficits in both cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge contributes to the pronounced reading difficulties observed in children with DD. 4.2 Differential Mechanisms of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge in TD and DD Children Findings from correlation and hierarchical regression analyses revealed distinct mechanisms in the TD and DD groups. Among TD children, vocabulary knowledge emerged as the primary predictor of reading comprehension. Cognitive-linguistic skills did not show a direct influence, but their effects were indirectly mediated through vocabulary and reading fluency. These results support models suggesting that, in skilled readers, foundational skills become automatized and exert influence primarily through higher-order linguistic processes (Nation & Snowling, 1997 ; Zhang et al., 2017 ). In contrast, for children with DD, both vocabulary knowledge and morphological awareness were significant predictors of reading comprehension, indicating that these children rely more directly on sub-lexical and morphological processing to compensate for weaknesses in lexical access and fluency. Structural equation modeling (SEM) clarified these divergent pathways. In TD children, phonological and morphological awareness predicted reading comprehension only indirectly via vocabulary knowledge and fluency. However, in the DD group, phonological awareness directly affected reading fluency, and morphological awareness had both direct and indirect effects on reading fluency and comprehension. Importantly, morphological awareness also exerted a direct influence on reading comprehension, partially mediated by vocabulary. These results expand upon the Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986 ) by demonstrating that the interaction between decoding and language comprehension varies with reading ability. While reading comprehension in TD children is primarily constrained by lexical-semantic knowledge, children with DD depend more broadly on multiple linguistic components, supporting interactive and compensatory models of reading development (Perfetti & Stafura, 2014 ). 4.3 Addressing Reviewer Concerns and Theoretical Clarifications In response to reviewer feedback, we explicitly clarify our distinction between domain-general cognitive abilities (e.g., working memory, executive control) and language-related cognitive-linguistic skills, which include phonological awareness, RAN, and morphological awareness. In line with contemporary reading science (Cain & Oakhill, 2014 ; Nation, 2019 ), the latter are treated as language-specific skills foundational to literacy development. Although dyslexia is recognized as a multifactorial disorder, our findings reinforce the critical role of linguistic-level deficits—particularly in morphology and vocabulary—as core contributors to reading impairment. These are not merely outcomes of limited reading experience, but rather fundamental constraints on reading development (Snowling & Hulme, 2012 ; Bishop & Snowling, 2004 ). Recent studies (e.g., Keshavarzi et al., 2024 ) have also identified prosodic and speech production impairments in children with DD, suggesting that a broader phonological profile—including suprasegmental aspects—may be relevant. While not directly assessed here, such evidence further supports a multidimensional model of phonological processing, especially in morphosyllabic writing systems like Chinese. By including students from Grades 2, 4, and 6 and statistically controlling for both age and nonverbal intelligence, our design controls for key developmental and cognitive confounds. Nevertheless, future longitudinal studies are needed to examine how developmental trajectories of morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge diverge between TD and DD populations over time (Yeung et al., 2014 ). 4.4 Educational Implications These findings have several important implications for reading instruction in Chinese. First, they underscore the need for differentiated intervention approaches that target both vocabulary depth and core cognitive-linguistic skills—particularly morphological awareness. One-size-fits-all reading programs may be insufficient for children with DD, who benefit from explicit instruction in linguistic structures and morpheme-based word formation strategies. Given that morphological awareness has a direct influence on reading comprehension in the DD group, morphology-focused interventions—such as structured training in compound word formation and morpheme identification—may be especially effective in Chinese (Ruan et al., 2024 ). Vocabulary instruction should extend beyond word lists to emphasize semantic mapping, contextual usage, and inference generation. In sum, our findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the cognitive profiles of Chinese children with DD and provide empirical support for linguistically informed, targeted instructional strategies that reflect the unique features of the Chinese writing system. 5. Conclusion Chinese children with developmental dyslexia (DD) exhibit significant deficits in language-related cognitive-linguistic skills—namely, phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and morphological awareness—along with lower vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension compared to their typically developing peers. In TD children, cognitive-linguistic skills influence reading comprehension indirectly, primarily via vocabulary and reading fluency. In contrast, morphological awareness in children with DD exerts a direct effect on reading comprehension, in addition to indirect influences. Overall, while cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge are essential for reading comprehension in both groups, the underlying mechanisms differ. Children with DD appear to rely more heavily on a broader range of linguistic skills to compensate for their difficulties, highlighting the importance of targeted, language-based interventions in educational settings. Declarations Conflict of Interest The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Author Contribution Chen. L. and Wang. J. (Jialei Wang) contributed to the formal analysis, methodology, and the original draft preparation. Wang. J. (Jun Wang) was additionally responsible for conceptualization, investigation, and writing the original draft. Zhang Y. supervised the study, reviewed and edited the manuscript, handled project administration and funding acquisition. Acknowledgement We thank all children, their parents and teachers who participated in this study. At the same time, we are also very grateful to the testers for their help in collecting data. Data Availability The datasets are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. References Bishop, D. V. M., & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Developmental Dyslexia and Specific Language Impairment: Same or Different? Psychological Bulletin , 130 (6), 858–886. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.858 Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2014). Reading comprehension and vocabulary: Is vocabulary more important for some aspects of comprehension? L'Année Psychologique , 114 (4), 647–662. https://doi.org/10.4074/S0003503314004035 Cain, K. (2016). Reading comprehension development and difficulties: An overview. Perspectives on Language and Literacy , 42 (2), 9–16. Cheng, Y., Wang, J., & Wu, X. (2018). 小学低年级儿童汉语语素意识在阅读理解中的作用: 字词阅读流畅性的中介效应[The role of morphological awareness in Chinese children’s reading comprehension: The mediating effect of word reading fluency]. Acta Psychologica Sinica , 50 (4), 413–423. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J. 1041.2018.00413 Cheng, Y., Zhang, J., Wu, X., Liu, H., & Li, H. (2016). Cross-lagged relationships between morphological awareness and reading comprehension among Chinese children. Frontiers in Psychology , 7 , 1379. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01379 Duff, F. J., Reen, G., Plunkett, K., & Nation, K. (2015). Do infant vocabulary skills predict school-age language and literacy outcomes? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 56 (8), 848–856. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12378 Goswami, U. (2011). A temporal sampling framework for developmental dyslexia. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 15 (1), 3–10. https://10.1016/j.tics.2010.10.001 Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. RASE: Remedial & Special Education , 7 (1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104 Ho, C. S. H., Law, T. P. S., & Ng, P. M. (2000). The phonological deficit hypothesis in Chinese developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing , 13 , 57–79. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008040922662 Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing , 2 , 127–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401799 James, E., Thompson, P. A., Bowes, L., & Nation, K. (2023). Heterogeneity in children’s reading comprehension difficulties: A latent class approach. JCPP Advances , 3 (4), e12177. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcv2.12177 Joshi, R. M., Tao, S., Aaron, P. G., & Quiroz, B. (2012). Cognitive component of componential model of reading applied to different orthographies. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 45 (5), 480–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219411432690 Kalindi, S. C., & Chung, K. K. H. (2018). The impact of morphological awareness on word reading and dictation in Chinese early adolescent readers with and without dyslexia. Frontiers in Psychology , 9 , 511. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00511 Keshavarzi, M., Di Liberto, G. M., Gabrielczyk, F., Wilson, A., Macfarlane, A., & Goswami, U. (2024). Atypical speech production of multisyllabic words and phrases by children with developmental dyslexia. Developmental Science , 27 (1), e13428. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13428 Kuo, L. J., & Anderson, R. C. (2006). Morphological awareness and learning to read: A cross–language perspective. Educational Psychologist , 41 (3), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4103_3 Lee, C. Y., Tsai, J. L., Huang, H. W., Hung, D. L., & Tzeng, O. J. (2006). The temporal signatures of semantic and phonological activations for Chinese sublexical processing: An event-related potential study. Brain Research , 1121 (1), 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.117 Lei, L., Pan, J., Liu, H., McBride-Chang, C., Li, H., Zhang, Y., & Shu, H. (2011). Developmental trajectories of reading development and impairment from ages 3 to 8 years in Chinese children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 52 (2), 212–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02311.x Li, H., Dong, Q., Zhu, J., Liu, J., & Wu, X. (2009). 语素意识在学前儿童言语技能发展中的作用[The role of morphological awareness in kindergarteners’ linguistic skill development]. Psychological Science , 32 (6), 1291–1294. https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2009.06.045 Li, H., Shu, H., McBride-Chang, C., Liu, H., & Peng, H. (2012). Chinese children’s character recognition: Visuo‐orthographic, phonological processing and morphological skills. Journal of Research in Reading , 35 (3), 287–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01460.x Li, L., & Wu, X. (2015). Effects of metalinguistic awareness on reading comprehension and the mediator role of reading fluency from grades 2 to 4. PLoS One , 10 (3), e0114417. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114417 Lin, Y., Zhang, X., Huang, Q., Lv, L., Huang, A., Li, A., Wu, K., & Huang, Y. (2020). The prevalence of dyslexia in primary school children and their Chinese literacy assessment in Shantou, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 17 (19), 7140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197140 Liu, P. D., & McBride-Chang, C. (2010). What is morphological awareness? Tapping lexical compounding awareness in Chinese third graders. Journal of Educational Psychology , 102 (1), 62–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016933 Lyon, G. R., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2003). A definition of dyslexia. Dyslexia , 9 (1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-003-0001-9 Moll, K., Ramus, F., Bartling, J., Bruder, J., Kunze, S., Neuhoff, N., & Landerl, K. (2014). Cognitive mechanisms underlying reading and spelling development in five European orthographies. Learning and Instruction , 29 , 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j. learninstruc.2013.09.003 Nation, K., & Snowling, M. (1997). Assessing reading difficulties: The validity and utility of current measures of reading skill. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 67 (3), 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1997.tb01250.x Nation, K. (2019). Children’s reading difficulties, language, and reflections on the simple view of reading. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties , 24 (1), 47–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2019.1609272 Pan, J., McBride-Chang, C., Shu, H., Liu, H., Zhang, Y., & Li, H. (2011). What is in the naming? A 5-year longitudinal study of early rapid naming and phonological sensitivity in relation to subsequent reading skills in both native Chinese and English as a second language. Journal of Educational Psychology , 103 (4), 897–908. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024344 Pennington, B. F. (2006). From single to multiple deficit models of developmental disorders. Cognition , 101 (2), 385–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.04.008 Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading , 18 (1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438 . 2013. 827687. Qiao, S., Liu, Y., & Yeung, S. S. S. (2021). Mechanisms by which morphological awareness contributes to Chinese and English reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading , 44 (1), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12345 Ramus, F. (2003). Developmental dyslexia: Specific phonological deficits or general sensorimotor dysfunction? Current Opinion in Neurology , 13 (2), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00035-7 Ruan, Y., Maurer, U., & McBride, C. (2024). Effectiveness of reading interventions on literacy skills for Chinese children with and without dyslexia: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Educational Psychology Review , 36 , 80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09915-9 Scarborough, H. S. (1990). Very Early Language Deficits in Dyslexic Children. Child Development , 61 (6), 1728–1743. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb03562.x Shu, H., McBride-Chang, C., Wu, S., & Liu, H. (2006). Understanding Chinese developmental dyslexia: Morphological awareness as a core cognitive construct. Journal of Educational Psychology , 98 (1), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.122 Snowling, M. J., & Hulme, C. (2012). Interventions for children’s language and literacy difficulties. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders , 47 (1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00081.x Solari, E. J., Grimm, R. P., McIntyre, N. S., & Denton, C. A. (2018). Reading comprehension development in at-risk vs. not at-risk first grade readers: The differential roles of listening comprehension, decoding, and fluency. Learning and Individual Differences , 65 , 195–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.06.005 Song, S., Su, M., Kang, C., Liu, H., Zhang, Y., McBride–Chang, C., et al. (2015). Tracing children’s vocabulary development from preschool through the school age years: An 8-year longitudinal study. Developmental Science , 18 (1), 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12190 Stein, J. (2019). The current status of the magnocellular theory of developmental dyslexia. Neuropsychologia , 130 , 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.03.022 Swan, D., & Goswami, U. (1997). Phonological awareness deficits in developmental dyslexia and the phonological representations hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology , 66 (1), 18–41. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1997.2375 Wen, H. (2005). 小学语文阅读能力测评量表的编制[Primary scholar’s Chinese reading ability scales development, validity, and reliability] (Master’s thesis). South China Normal University, Guangzhou. Wu, S., Shu, H., & Liu, Y. (2005). 语素意识在儿童汉语阅读中的作用[The role of morphological awareness in Chinese children reading]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior , 3 (1), 35–40. Xie, R., Zhang, J., Wu, X., & Nguyen, T. P. (2019). The relationship between morphological awareness and reading comprehension among Chinese children. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , 54. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00054 Yeung, P., Ho, C. S., Chan, D. W., & Chung, K. K. (2014). -h. What are the early indicators of persistent word reading difficulties among Chinese readers in elementary grades? Dyslexia , 20 (2), 119–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1471 Zhang, Y., Dong, Q., Shu, H., & Wu, Y. (2017). 语音意识、命名速度和语素意识在汉语阅读发展中的作用[The roles of phonological awareness, naming speed, and morphological awareness in Chinese reading development]. Psychological Development and Education , 33 (4), 401–409. https://doi.org/10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2017.04.03 Zhang, H., & Wang, X. (1985). Raven’s IQ reasoning standardized test . Department of Psychology, Beijing Normal University. Zhao, Y., Wu, X., Sun, P., Xie, R., Feng, J., & Chen, H. (2019). The relationship between morphological awareness and reading comprehension among Chinese children: Evidence from multiple mediation models. Learning and Individual Differences , 72 , 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.04.005 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7278840","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":499064551,"identity":"155972f3-ce04-40fb-8fc8-1dfc8cf2f9d1","order_by":0,"name":"Liuxin Chen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hebei Normal University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Liuxin","middleName":"","lastName":"Chen","suffix":""},{"id":499064552,"identity":"3980bbc9-a97d-4155-8117-bec386933cdb","order_by":1,"name":"Jialei Wang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hebei Normal University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jialei","middleName":"","lastName":"Wang","suffix":""},{"id":499064553,"identity":"613e504f-78bf-44db-b743-f37d55381cba","order_by":2,"name":"Jun Wang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Shandong Huayu University of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jun","middleName":"","lastName":"Wang","suffix":""},{"id":499064554,"identity":"58d738df-9edf-4d36-839b-6065cfcdd11e","order_by":3,"name":"Yajing Zhang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hebei Normal University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yajing","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhang","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-02 14:23:21","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7278840/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7278840/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":89455018,"identity":"8f1f635d-8201-4a3d-9374-53eaa2e2cccc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-20 06:49:47","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":45533,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe structural equation model of CA children\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003ePA = phonological awareness; RAN = rapid automatized naming; MA = morphological awareness; VK = vocabulary knowledge; RF = reading fluency; RC = reading comprehension. \u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e0.05，\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e0.001.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7278840/v1/17379ae318b54b85848918b4.jpeg"},{"id":89455015,"identity":"8d3d1b45-befa-4132-a75d-11e72b4cc1ce","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-20 06:49:47","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":42255,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe structural equation model of DD children\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003ePA = phonological awareness; RAN = rapid automatized naming; MA = morphological awareness; VK = vocabulary knowledge; RF = reading fluency; RC = reading comprehension. \u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e0.05，\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e0.01, \u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e0.001.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7278840/v1/7848d0b662a932c05bb13447.jpeg"},{"id":89453576,"identity":"a0c0955f-b7a8-4603-bcb8-19a41d34ced1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-20 06:41:47","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":163238,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe scatter plots depicting the scores of the DD and CA groups on various tests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e(a) Literacy test; (b) Phonological awareness test; (c) Rapid automatized naming test; (d) Morphological awareness test; (e) Vocabulary knowledge test; (f) Reading fluency test; (g) Reading comprehension.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7278840/v1/6895625d156d793f71957307.jpeg"},{"id":92662328,"identity":"1a8badd0-887c-4d11-bfbc-53e455a20648","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-02 15:16:45","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1608721,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7278840/v1/dccfb3d6-8300-4e42-b6d2-7f8b94397986.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Differential Contributions of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge to Reading Comprehension in Chinese Children With and Without Developmental Dyslexia","fulltext":[{"header":"1 Introduction","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.1 Importance of Reading and Theoretical Framework\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eReading is a foundational skill essential for knowledge acquisition, academic success, and lifelong learning. Among its subcomponents, reading comprehension\u0026mdash;the ability to extract and construct meaning from written text\u0026mdash;represents the ultimate goal of reading development. The Simple View of Reading (SVR; Hoover \u0026amp; Gough, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e) posits that reading comprehension is determined by two relatively independent components: decoding and linguistic comprehension. While decoding in alphabetic languages typically involves grapheme\u0026ndash;phoneme correspondence, in logographic scripts such as Chinese, it is more accurately conceptualized as word recognition (Joshi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin this framework, cognitive-linguistic skills such as phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and rapid automatized naming are considered critical for decoding, while vocabulary knowledge primarily supports linguistic comprehension (Duff et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Perfetti \u0026amp; Stafura, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). These language-related abilities are distinct from domain-general cognitive skills and have been consistently identified as core predictors of reading development (Cain \u0026amp; Oakhill, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Nation \u0026amp; Snowling, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e). Recent advances in reading comprehension research have increasingly underscored the developmental heterogeneity of reading profiles, highlighting that poor comprehension can arise through diverse cognitive-linguistic pathways depending on individual risk and trajectory (James et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Solari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). This complexity has not been adequately explored in research on Chinese developmental dyslexia.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTheoretical models of dyslexia have also highlighted underlying processing deficits. For example, auditory-based theories emphasize impairments in temporal auditory processing (Ramus, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e), while visual-based theories point to reduced visual attention span (Stein, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). These perspectives are supported by neuroimaging findings, such as EEG studies, which show atypical neural responses to speech and print stimuli in individuals with dyslexia (Goswami, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), reinforcing the multifactorial and neurobiological basis of reading difficulties.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.2 Developmental Dyslexia and Its Underlying Mechanisms\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDevelopmental dyslexia (DD) is a specific learning disorder characterized by persistent difficulties in word-level reading despite adequate intelligence and educational exposure (Lyon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). In Chinese, DD manifests differently from alphabetic languages due to the unique orthographic, phonological, and morphological properties of the writing system. Although DD is widely recognized as a neurodevelopmental disorder with genetic, neural, and environmental origins (Pennington, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e), cognitive-linguistic factors are central to its behavioral expression.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLanguage-specific impairments\u0026mdash;especially in phonological processing\u0026mdash;are widely regarded as core deficits in dyslexia (Snowling \u0026amp; Hulme, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Vocabulary knowledge is also often found to be limited in children with DD, potentially compounding their reading difficulties. However, vocabulary deficits are typically considered consequences or co-occurring symptoms rather than primary causes (Bishop \u0026amp; Snowling, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn line with this view, the current study focuses on cognitive-linguistic skills\u0026mdash;phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and rapid automatized naming\u0026mdash;and vocabulary knowledge as key components of reading development. These skills have been shown to be impaired in children with DD and are particularly relevant for understanding individual differences in reading comprehension (Scarborough, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough this study centers on reading-related abilities, we acknowledge the importance of distinguishing DD from comorbid conditions such as developmental language disorder (DLD), which may present overlapping symptoms. While we did not formally assess DLD in the current sample, future work should incorporate screening procedures to examine comorbidity and refine diagnostic clarity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.3 Cognitive-Linguistic Skills in Chinese Reading\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn Chinese, phonological awareness plays a role in early reading development but is relatively less predictive of reading outcomes compared to alphabetic languages, due to the limited grapheme\u0026ndash;phoneme correspondence (Ho et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, morphological awareness is particularly important given the morpheme-based structure of Chinese characters and the prevalence of compound words (Shu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Lee et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Prior studies have consistently demonstrated that morphological awareness predicts both reading fluency and comprehension among Chinese-speaking children (Cheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Qiao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRapid automatized naming (RAN) is another well-established predictor of reading ability. RAN reflects the efficiency of accessing and retrieving phonological and semantic information and is considered an indicator of processing speed and lexical access (Lin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVocabulary knowledge, reflecting the breadth and depth of lexical representations, is essential for both listening and reading comprehension (Kuo \u0026amp; Anderson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Song et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Although vocabulary development has been extensively examined in typically developing children and second-language learners, relatively little is known about its role in Chinese children with dyslexia. Given that poor vocabulary knowledge may constrain higher-level text processing and integration, this gap warrants further investigation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRecent research has highlighted the mediating role of vocabulary and morphological awareness in reading comprehension, particularly in orthographically complex languages such as Chinese (Li \u0026amp; Wu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Zhao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.4 Research Gaps and Rationale for the Study\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite extensive research on the cognitive and linguistic profiles of children with DD, the interplay between cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge\u0026mdash;and their differential contributions to reading comprehension in children with and without DD\u0026mdash;remains insufficiently explored in Chinese-speaking populations. Moreover, few studies have examined how these relationships may change with age or educational stage. For instance, phonological awareness tends to stabilize in earlier grades, while morphological awareness continues to develop (Yeung et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). These developmental trajectories have rarely been controlled for or directly addressed in prior group comparisons.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCalls for more nuanced understanding of individual differences in reading pathways and their developmental course have grown in recent years (James et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Solari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). However, such perspectives are still underrepresented in research on Chinese developmental dyslexia.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.5 Research Objectives and Hypotheses\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study investigates how cognitive-linguistic skills (phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and rapid automatized naming) and vocabulary knowledge contribute to reading comprehension in Chinese children with and without developmental dyslexia. Specifically, we aim to determine whether the predictive mechanisms differ across these two groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on existing theoretical and empirical literature, we formulated the following hypotheses:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eChildren with DD will perform significantly worse than typically developing children on measures of cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, and reading comprehension.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eCognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge will predict reading comprehension in both groups, but the strength and pathways of these effects will differ between children with and without DD.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.6 Significance of the Study\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study contributes to the growing body of research on reading development by examining how cognitive-linguistic and vocabulary factors jointly influence reading comprehension in Chinese children. By extending the application of the Simple View of Reading to a non-alphabetic context, it enhances our understanding of reading mechanisms across writing systems. The findings also offer practical implications for educational interventions, suggesting the need for tailored approaches that address the distinct reading profiles of children with developmental dyslexia.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, this study responds to calls in the literature for more sophisticated models of reading that account for developmental and cross-linguistic variation (Cain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Nation, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"2 Material and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.1 Participants\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA total of 980 students from Grades 2, 4, and 6 at a primary school in Hebei Province, China, were administered the Raven\u0026rsquo;s Standard Progressive Matrices (Zhang \u0026amp; Wang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1985\u003c/span\u003e) to assess nonverbal intelligence, and a standardized literacy scale to evaluate reading achievement (Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Based on the ability\u0026ndash;achievement discrepancy model, 111 children were identified as having developmental dyslexia (DD). The dyslexic group consisted of 41 second graders (21 boys), 43 fourth graders (24 boys), and 27 sixth graders (17 boys).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo form a matched control group, 111 typically developing children were selected from the same school, matched by age and grade level. The control (CA) group included 43 second graders (22 boys), 39 fourth graders (21 boys), and 29 sixth graders (15 boys). This yielded a total sample of 222 participants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Hebei Normal University, and all procedures conformed to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from the parents or legal guardians of all participating children, as well as from their classroom teachers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e presents a comparative analysis of age and literacy scores between the DD and CA groups. No significant differences in age were found between the groups across grades (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.05), indicating appropriate group matching. However, children in the DD group scored significantly lower than their typically developing peers on the literacy test (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), confirming the validity of the screening criteria. These results indicate that the selected sample meets the criteria of the ability\u0026ndash;achievement discrepancy model and is appropriate for subsequent analyses.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComparison of differences between CA and DD group in screening tests scores (M\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCA group\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDD group\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAge (year)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.29\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9.53\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.30\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRaven\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e38.59\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.92\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e37.19\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.03\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.61\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLiteracy (words)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e97.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;35.66\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e68.72\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;37.01\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.97\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.001.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2 Measures\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study assessed participants\u0026rsquo; cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. The cognitive-linguistic components included phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming (RAN), and morphological awareness. All tasks were administered individually in a quiet classroom setting by trained graduate students. The details of each measure are provided below.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.1 Phonological Awareness\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhonological awareness was measured using a phoneme deletion task (Lei et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). The task included 4 practice items and 12 test items. Each item consisted of an orally presented syllable (e.g., /zuo3/), and the child was asked to delete a specified phoneme (e.g., /o/) and pronounce the remaining syllable. One point was awarded for each correct response, with a maximum score of 12.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.2 Rapid Automatized Naming\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eRapid naming ability was assessed using a Rapid Automatized Naming of Numbers task (Lei et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). A 5\u0026times;5 matrix containing five digits (e.g., 2, 4, 6, 7, 9), each repeated five times in random order, was presented. Children were instructed to name the numbers as quickly and accurately as possible. The total time (in seconds) taken to complete the task was recorded. Faster times indicate better performance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.3 Morphological Awareness\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eMorphological awareness was assessed using three tasks:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHomophonic Morphological Awareness: In this task, adapted from Shu et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e), the experimenter orally presented a word (e.g., 石头, \u0026lsquo;stone\u0026rsquo;) and highlighted a morpheme (e.g., 石). The child was then asked to generate as many different words as possible that share the same pronunciation as the target morpheme (e.g., 时间 \u0026lsquo;time\u0026rsquo;, 十个 \u0026lsquo;ten\u0026rsquo;, 认识 \u0026lsquo;recognize\u0026rsquo;). There were 12 items, with a 30-second time limit per item. One point was awarded for each correct word produced. There was no upper limit to the total score.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHomographic Morphological Awareness (Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e): Children were orally presented with two-character words (e.g., 面条 \u0026lsquo;noodles\u0026rsquo;), with one morpheme (e.g., 面) specified as the target. They were required to produce two new words: one with the same meaning as the target morpheme (e.g., 面粉 \u0026lsquo;flour\u0026rsquo;) and one with a different meaning (e.g., 里面 \u0026lsquo;inside\u0026rsquo;). One point was awarded per correct response. The task included 12 items, with a maximum score of 24 points.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCompound Morphological Awareness: This task required children to generate novel compound words based on brief semantic prompts describing invented objects or concepts. For example, for the prompt \u0026ldquo;What do you call a basket made of paper?\u0026rdquo; (用纸编的篮子叫什么?), the correct answer would be 纸篮 (paper basket). There were 12 items, and responses were rated on a 0\u0026ndash;2 point scale for semantic appropriateness and morphological structure, yielding a maximum score of 24.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.4 Vocabulary Knowledge\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eVocabulary knowledge was assessed using a vocabulary definition task (Liu \u0026amp; McBride-Chang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), which included 32 words ranging from easy to difficult. Children were asked to provide definitions for orally presented words. Responses were scored based on the number of semantic features provided. A definition that correctly included both categorical and defining characteristics received 2 points, a partially correct response received 1 point, and irrelevant or repeated responses scored 0. For example, for 厨房 (kitchen), a response such as \u0026ldquo;a place for cooking\u0026rdquo; received 2 points, while \u0026ldquo;a place in the house\u0026rdquo; received 1 point. The task was discontinued if a child scored 0 on five consecutive items. The maximum score was 64 points.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.5 Reading Fluency\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eReading fluency was assessed using a three-minute sentence verification task (Pan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), consisting of 100 sentences of increasing length. Children were asked to read the sentences silently and judge whether each one was semantically correct (e.g., 天安门在北京, \u0026lsquo;Tiananmen is in Beijing\u0026rsquo; \u0026ndash; correct). Within a three-minute time limit, they marked each sentence as true or false. The final fluency score was calculated as the total number of characters in correctly answered items minus the number of characters in incorrectly answered items.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.6 Reading Comprehension\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eReading comprehension was assessed using grade-appropriate tasks selected from a standardized and widely used Chinese reading comprehension test (Wen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e), which has demonstrated strong reliability and has been extensively applied in previous studies (Cheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Xie et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Separate texts and questions were used for Grades 2, 4, and 6 to reflect developmental differences in reading abilities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEach task consisted of a narrative passage followed by multiple-choice and one open-ended question. For example, the Grade 2 passage (Beautiful Flower Garden) contained 329 characters and was followed by 7 multiple-choice items and 1 open-ended question; Grade 4 (The Big Rooster), 393 characters and 10 questions; Grade 6 (In the Vegetable Garden), 706 characters and 15 questions. The multiple-choice items primarily assessed the ability to locate and recall key information, draw simple inferences, and integrate content\u0026mdash;cognitive processes essential to reading comprehension.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe open-ended question required children to summarize or explain key aspects of the text in their own words, thereby assessing the construction of a coherent mental representation. Answers were scored on a 3-point scale based on accuracy and completeness. Total reading comprehension scores were calculated by summing the scores from both item types. This assessment approach reflects the core processes of reading comprehension: identifying key information, maintaining it in working memory, and integrating it into long-term understanding.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.3 Procedure\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eChildren with developmental dyslexia (DD) and age-matched typically developing controls (CA) were first identified through the administration of the Raven\u0026rsquo;s Standard Progressive Matrices and the Literacy Scale Test. Only those meeting the criteria based on the ability\u0026ndash;achievement discrepancy model were included in the subsequent testing phase.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll participants completed the full battery of assessments described in Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2.2\u003c/span\u003e, including tasks measuring phonological awareness, rapid automatized, naming, morphological awareness, vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo derive a composite score for morphological awareness, raw scores from the three subtests (homophonic, homographic, and compound morphological tasks) were standardized (z-scores) and then averaged. This approach ensured that each component contributed equally to the overall morphological awareness index.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll data were analyzed using SPSS version 26.0 for descriptive statistics and group comparisons, and AMOS version 24.0 was used for structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the hypothesized relationships among cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, and reading comprehension.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3 Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Group Differences in Cognitive-Linguistic Skills, Vocabulary Knowledge, and Reading Performance\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndependent samples t-tests were conducted to compare the performance of children with developmental dyslexia (DD) and their typically developing peers (CA group) across key variables (see Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Results indicated that children in the DD group scored significantly lower than those in the CA group on measures of cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003es\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eComparison of differences between CA and DD group in all variables scores (M\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCA group\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDD group\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePhonological awareness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.52\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.27\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.31\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRapid automatized naming\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.22\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.23\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-5.87\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMorphological awareness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.48\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.21\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;11.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.73\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVocabulary knowledge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.68\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.55\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.21\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReading fluency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1116.34\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;683.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e317.37\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;172.34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.95\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReading comprehension\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.59\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.11\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.61\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.001.\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Correlation Analysis Between Cognitive-Linguistic Skills, Vocabulary Knowledge, and Reading Comprehension in CA and DD Groups\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpearman correlation analyses were conducted separately for the CA and DD groups to examine the relationships among cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, and reading comprehension (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Results revealed that rapid automatized naming was significantly negatively correlated with all other variables, while significant positive correlations were found among the remaining variables across both groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorrelation analysis between various variables in CA children (bottom left) and DD children (top right)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1 Phonological awareness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.42\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.55\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.50\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.61\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.40\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2 Rapid automatized naming\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.57\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.53\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.61\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.72\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.45\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 Morphological awareness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.66\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.76\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.78\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.74\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4 Vocabulary knowledge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.66\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.79\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.85\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.72\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5 Reading fluency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.63\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.85\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.71\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6 Reading comprehension\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.57\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.72\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.73\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Using the Bonferroni-corrected/adjusted \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e value for correlations, the Bonferrioni corrected \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e is 0.05/5\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.01, * signifies \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01.\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.3 Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge on Reading Comprehension in CA and DD Groups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo examine the unique contributions of cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge to reading comprehension, a hierarchical regression analysis was performed separately for the CA and DD groups, controlling for age and intelligence. Reading comprehension served as the dependent variable. The results are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHierarchical regression analysis of cognitive skills and vocabulary knowledge on reading comprehension in CA and DD children\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGroup\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDependent variable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStep\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePredictive variables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026Delta;R\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026Delta;F\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.566\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.566\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70.433\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.743\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.254\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRaven\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.454\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.659\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.093\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.604\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.041\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.536\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRAN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.174\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.849\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.269\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.774\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVK\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.698\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.039\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.439\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.358\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.666\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVK\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.691\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.125\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.219\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.461\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.574\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.698\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.868\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.006\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.081\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRAN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.085\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.981\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.192\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.192\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.827\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.414\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.258\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRaven\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.048\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.492\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.515\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.323\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.313\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.143\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRAN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.019\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.684\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.397\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVK\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.579\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.064\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.731\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.473\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.966\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVK\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.542\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e81.709\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.728\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.039\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.579\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.037\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.036\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.201\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRAN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.034\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.402\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.889\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"9\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e PA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;phonological awareness; RAN\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;rapid automatized naming; MA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;morphological awareness; VK\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;vocabulary knowledge; RC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;reading comprehension. \u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.01, \u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.001.\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the CA group, when cognitive-linguistic skills were entered in the second step and vocabulary knowledge in the third, cognitive-linguistic skills accounted for 9.3% of the variance in reading comprehension, while vocabulary knowledge accounted for 3.9%. Only morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge showed significant predictive effects on reading comprehension. Conversely, when vocabulary knowledge was entered in the second step and cognitive-linguistic skills in the third, vocabulary knowledge explained 12.5% of the variance, whereas cognitive-linguistic skills accounted for only 0.8%. These findings suggest that vocabulary knowledge has a comparatively greater influence on reading comprehension in typically developing Chinese children than cognitive-linguistic skills.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the DD group, with cognitive-linguistic skills entered at the second step and vocabulary knowledge at the third, cognitive-linguistic skills explained 32.3% of the variance in reading comprehension, and vocabulary knowledge explained 6.4%. Morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge were significant predictors. When vocabulary knowledge was entered at the second step and cognitive-linguistic skills at the third, vocabulary knowledge accounted for 35% of the variance, and cognitive-linguistic skills explained 3.7%. Both morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge significantly predicted reading comprehension. These results indicate that while vocabulary knowledge exerts a strong influence on reading comprehension in children with DD, cognitive-linguistic skills also play a more prominent role compared to typically developing children.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall, the results suggest that reading comprehension in typically developing children mainly depends on vocabulary knowledge, whereas in children with DD, it relies not only on vocabulary knowledge but also requires greater involvement of cognitive-linguistic skills.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.4 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) of the Relationship Among Cognitive-Linguistic Skills, Vocabulary Knowledge, and Reading Comprehension in CA and DD Children\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo further examine the mechanisms through which cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge contribute to reading comprehension in typically developing (CA) and developmentally dyslexic (DD) children, separate structural equation models were constructed for each group using AMOS 24.0. These models allowed us to compare the pathways and strengths of relationships between key variables across the two populations.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImportantly, grade level and nonverbal intelligence (Raven\u0026rsquo;s scores) were statistically controlled in both models to account for potential confounding effects. However, to maintain model parsimony and clarity, these control variables were not visually represented in the SEM diagrams.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe SEM for the CA group demonstrated good fit indices: \u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003e/df\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.21, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.30;, \u003cem\u003eRMSEA\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.04, \u003cem\u003eSRMR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.03, \u003cem\u003eGFI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.98, \u003cem\u003eTLI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.00, \u003cem\u003eCFI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.00. The model is illustrated in Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. Significant correlations were observed among phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and morphological awareness (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003epr\u003c/sub\u003e =-0.57, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001; \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003epm\u003c/sub\u003e=0.65, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001; \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eRM\u003c/sub\u003e=-0.74, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and morphological awareness signigicantly predicted vocabulary knowledge(\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003ePV\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.14, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05; \u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eRV\u003c/sub\u003e=-0.29, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001; \u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eMV\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.49, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Vocabulary knowledge and rapid automatized naming also had significant effects on reading fluency༈\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eVF\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.52, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001; \u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eRF\u003c/sub\u003e=-0.39, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Finally, reading fluency had a strong positive effect on reading comprehension༈\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eFC\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.86, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe SEM model for children with DD demonstrated an acceptable fit: \u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003e/df\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.42, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05; \u003cem\u003eRMSEA\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.11, \u003cem\u003eSRMR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.03, \u003cem\u003eGFI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.97, \u003cem\u003eTLI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.95, \u003cem\u003eCFI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.99. The model is depicted in Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. Significant correlations were found among phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and morphological awareness (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003ePR\u003c/sub\u003e=-0.45, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001; \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003ePM\u003c/sub\u003e=0.52, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001; \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eRM\u003c/sub\u003e=-0.55, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Furthermore, rapid automatized naming and morphological awareness significantly predicted vocabulary knowledge(\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eRV\u003c/sub\u003e=-0.17, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01; \u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eMV\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.72, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, morphological awareness, and vocabulary knowledge all had significant effects on reading fluency༈\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003ePF\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.19, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001; \u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eRF\u003c/sub\u003e=-0.18, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01; \u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eMF\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.21, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05; \u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eVF\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.45, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001༉. Moreover, morphological awareness and reading fluency significantly influenced reading comprehension༈\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eMC\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.31, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01; \u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eFC\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.51, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001༉.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eComparing the SEM pathways of typically developing (CA) and children with developmental dyslexia (DD), notable differences emerge in the effects of phonological awareness and morphological awareness on reading comprehension. In the CA group, phonological awareness and morphological awareness influenced reading fluency entirely through vocabulary knowledge, indicating a full mediation effect.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn contrast, among children with DD, phonological awareness had a direct effect on reading fluency. Morphological awareness not only influenced reading fluency indirectly via vocabulary knowledge but also exerted direct effects on both reading fluency and reading comprehension. Thus, vocabulary knowledge played a partial mediating role in the relationship between cognitive-linguistic skills and reading outcomes in children with DD.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5 Scatter Plots of Individual Test Scores for DD and CA Groups\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBased on the scatter plot results, it can be inferred that the distributions of the two groups of children are similar across all test. However, overall, the DD group trails behind the CA group in all test.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.1 Deficits in Cognitive-Linguistic Skills, Vocabulary Knowledge, and Reading Comprehension in Children with DD\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study found that children with developmental dyslexia (DD) performed significantly worse than their typically developing (TD) peers across a range of cognitive-linguistic skills\u0026mdash;specifically phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming (RAN), and morphological awareness\u0026mdash;as well as vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension. These results align with prior research on Chinese-speaking children with DD, which has consistently documented impairments in these domains (Ho et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; Kalindi \u0026amp; Chung, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Lin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Notably, deficits in morphological awareness appear particularly pronounced in Chinese readers (Shu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Wu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhonological awareness deficits can hinder the acquisition of accurate grapheme\u0026ndash;phoneme correspondences, impeding early decoding (Swan \u0026amp; Goswami, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e). Impairments in RAN reflect reduced efficiency in accessing phonological representations from visual input, which can compromise reading fluency and downstream comprehension (Moll et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, consistent with the views of Nation (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) and Cain (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), our findings confirm that vocabulary knowledge is central to the construction of coherent mental representations of text. Limited lexical-semantic knowledge constrains inference generation and semantic integration, two critical processes in reading comprehension. Thus, the co-occurrence of deficits in both cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge contributes to the pronounced reading difficulties observed in children with DD.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.2 Differential Mechanisms of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge in TD and DD Children\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFindings from correlation and hierarchical regression analyses revealed distinct mechanisms in the TD and DD groups. Among TD children, vocabulary knowledge emerged as the primary predictor of reading comprehension. Cognitive-linguistic skills did not show a direct influence, but their effects were indirectly mediated through vocabulary and reading fluency. These results support models suggesting that, in skilled readers, foundational skills become automatized and exert influence primarily through higher-order linguistic processes (Nation \u0026amp; Snowling, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, for children with DD, both vocabulary knowledge and morphological awareness were significant predictors of reading comprehension, indicating that these children rely more directly on sub-lexical and morphological processing to compensate for weaknesses in lexical access and fluency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStructural equation modeling (SEM) clarified these divergent pathways. In TD children, phonological and morphological awareness predicted reading comprehension only indirectly via vocabulary knowledge and fluency. However, in the DD group, phonological awareness directly affected reading fluency, and morphological awareness had both direct and indirect effects on reading fluency and comprehension. Importantly, morphological awareness also exerted a direct influence on reading comprehension, partially mediated by vocabulary.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese results expand upon the Simple View of Reading (Gough \u0026amp; Tunmer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e) by demonstrating that the interaction between decoding and language comprehension varies with reading ability. While reading comprehension in TD children is primarily constrained by lexical-semantic knowledge, children with DD depend more broadly on multiple linguistic components, supporting interactive and compensatory models of reading development (Perfetti \u0026amp; Stafura, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.3 Addressing Reviewer Concerns and Theoretical Clarifications\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn response to reviewer feedback, we explicitly clarify our distinction between domain-general cognitive abilities (e.g., working memory, executive control) and language-related cognitive-linguistic skills, which include phonological awareness, RAN, and morphological awareness. In line with contemporary reading science (Cain \u0026amp; Oakhill, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Nation, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), the latter are treated as language-specific skills foundational to literacy development.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough dyslexia is recognized as a multifactorial disorder, our findings reinforce the critical role of linguistic-level deficits\u0026mdash;particularly in morphology and vocabulary\u0026mdash;as core contributors to reading impairment. These are not merely outcomes of limited reading experience, but rather fundamental constraints on reading development (Snowling \u0026amp; Hulme, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Bishop \u0026amp; Snowling, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRecent studies (e.g., Keshavarzi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) have also identified prosodic and speech production impairments in children with DD, suggesting that a broader phonological profile\u0026mdash;including suprasegmental aspects\u0026mdash;may be relevant. While not directly assessed here, such evidence further supports a multidimensional model of phonological processing, especially in morphosyllabic writing systems like Chinese.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBy including students from Grades 2, 4, and 6 and statistically controlling for both age and nonverbal intelligence, our design controls for key developmental and cognitive confounds. Nevertheless, future longitudinal studies are needed to examine how developmental trajectories of morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge diverge between TD and DD populations over time (Yeung et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec26\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.4 Educational Implications\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings have several important implications for reading instruction in Chinese. First, they underscore the need for differentiated intervention approaches that target both vocabulary depth and core cognitive-linguistic skills\u0026mdash;particularly morphological awareness. One-size-fits-all reading programs may be insufficient for children with DD, who benefit from explicit instruction in linguistic structures and morpheme-based word formation strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGiven that morphological awareness has a direct influence on reading comprehension in the DD group, morphology-focused interventions\u0026mdash;such as structured training in compound word formation and morpheme identification\u0026mdash;may be especially effective in Chinese (Ruan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Vocabulary instruction should extend beyond word lists to emphasize semantic mapping, contextual usage, and inference generation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn sum, our findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the cognitive profiles of Chinese children with DD and provide empirical support for linguistically informed, targeted instructional strategies that reflect the unique features of the Chinese writing system.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eChinese children with developmental dyslexia (DD) exhibit significant deficits in language-related cognitive-linguistic skills\u0026mdash;namely, phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and morphological awareness\u0026mdash;along with lower vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension compared to their typically developing peers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn TD children, cognitive-linguistic skills influence reading comprehension indirectly, primarily via vocabulary and reading fluency. In contrast, morphological awareness in children with DD exerts a direct effect on reading comprehension, in addition to indirect influences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOverall, while cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge are essential for reading comprehension in both groups, the underlying mechanisms differ. Children with DD appear to rely more heavily on a broader range of linguistic skills to compensate for their difficulties, highlighting the importance of targeted, language-based interventions in educational settings.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConflict of Interest\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eChen. L. and Wang. J. (Jialei Wang) contributed to the formal analysis, methodology, and the original draft preparation. Wang. J. (Jun Wang) was additionally responsible for conceptualization, investigation, and writing the original draft. Zhang Y. supervised the study, reviewed and edited the manuscript, handled project administration and funding acquisition.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe thank all children, their parents and teachers who participated in this study. At the same time, we are also very grateful to the testers for their help in collecting data.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe datasets are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBishop, D. V. M., \u0026amp; Snowling, M. J. (2004). Developmental Dyslexia and Specific Language Impairment: Same or Different? \u003cem\u003ePsychological Bulletin\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e130\u003c/em\u003e(6), 858\u0026ndash;886. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.858\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.858\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCain, K., \u0026amp; Oakhill, J. (2014). Reading comprehension and vocabulary: Is vocabulary more important for some aspects of comprehension? \u003cem\u003eL'Ann\u0026eacute;e Psychologique\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e114\u003c/em\u003e(4), 647\u0026ndash;662. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4074/S0003503314004035\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4074/S0003503314004035\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCain, K. (2016). Reading comprehension development and difficulties: An overview. \u003cem\u003ePerspectives on Language and Literacy\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e(2), 9\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCheng, Y., Wang, J., \u0026amp; Wu, X. (2018). 小学低年级儿童汉语语素意识在阅读理解中的作用: 字词阅读流畅性的中介效应[The role of morphological awareness in Chinese children\u0026rsquo;s reading comprehension: The mediating effect of word reading fluency]. \u003cem\u003eActa Psychologica Sinica\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e(4), 413\u0026ndash;423. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J. 1041.2018.00413\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3724/SP.J. 1041.2018.00413\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCheng, Y., Zhang, J., Wu, X., Liu, H., \u0026amp; Li, H. (2016). Cross-lagged relationships between morphological awareness and reading comprehension among Chinese children. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e, 1379. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01379\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01379\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDuff, F. J., Reen, G., Plunkett, K., \u0026amp; Nation, K. (2015). Do infant vocabulary skills predict school-age language and literacy outcomes? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e56\u003c/em\u003e(8), 848\u0026ndash;856. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12378\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/jcpp.12378\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoswami, U. (2011). A temporal sampling framework for developmental dyslexia. \u003cem\u003eTrends in Cognitive Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3\u0026ndash;10. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://10.1016/j.tics.2010.10.001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://10.1016/j.tics.2010.10.001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGough, P. B., \u0026amp; Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. \u003cem\u003eRASE: Remedial \u0026amp; Special Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(1), 6\u0026ndash;10. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/074193258600700104\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHo, C. S. H., Law, T. P. S., \u0026amp; Ng, P. M. (2000). The phonological deficit hypothesis in Chinese developmental dyslexia. \u003cem\u003eReading and Writing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e, 57\u0026ndash;79. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008040922662\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1023/A:1008040922662\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoover, W. A., \u0026amp; Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. \u003cem\u003eReading and Writing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e, 127\u0026ndash;160. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401799\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/BF00401799\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJames, E., Thompson, P. A., Bowes, L., \u0026amp; Nation, K. (2023). Heterogeneity in children\u0026rsquo;s reading comprehension difficulties: A latent class approach. \u003cem\u003eJCPP Advances\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(4), e12177. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/jcv2.12177\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/jcv2.12177\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJoshi, R. M., Tao, S., Aaron, P. G., \u0026amp; Quiroz, B. (2012). Cognitive component of componential model of reading applied to different orthographies. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Learning Disabilities\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(5), 480\u0026ndash;486. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0022219411432690\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0022219411432690\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKalindi, S. C., \u0026amp; Chung, K. K. H. (2018). The impact of morphological awareness on word reading and dictation in Chinese early adolescent readers with and without dyslexia. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e, 511. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00511\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00511\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKeshavarzi, M., Di Liberto, G. M., Gabrielczyk, F., Wilson, A., Macfarlane, A., \u0026amp; Goswami, U. (2024). Atypical speech production of multisyllabic words and phrases by children with developmental dyslexia. \u003cem\u003eDevelopmental Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(1), e13428. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13428\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/desc.13428\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKuo, L. J., \u0026amp; Anderson, R. C. (2006). Morphological awareness and learning to read: A cross\u0026ndash;language perspective. \u003cem\u003eEducational Psychologist\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e(3), 161\u0026ndash;180. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4103_3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1207/s15326985ep4103_3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee, C. Y., Tsai, J. L., Huang, H. W., Hung, D. L., \u0026amp; Tzeng, O. J. (2006). The temporal signatures of semantic and phonological activations for Chinese sublexical processing: An event-related potential study. \u003cem\u003eBrain Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1121\u003c/em\u003e(1), 150\u0026ndash;159. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.117\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.117\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLei, L., Pan, J., Liu, H., McBride-Chang, C., Li, H., Zhang, Y., \u0026amp; Shu, H. (2011). Developmental trajectories of reading development and impairment from ages 3 to 8 years in Chinese children. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e(2), 212\u0026ndash;220. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02311.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02311.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, H., Dong, Q., Zhu, J., Liu, J., \u0026amp; Wu, X. (2009). 语素意识在学前儿童言语技能发展中的作用[The role of morphological awareness in kindergarteners\u0026rsquo; linguistic skill development]. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1291\u0026ndash;1294. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2009.06.045\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2009.06.045\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, H., Shu, H., McBride-Chang, C., Liu, H., \u0026amp; Peng, H. (2012). Chinese children\u0026rsquo;s character recognition: Visuo‐orthographic, phonological processing and morphological skills. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Reading\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(3), 287\u0026ndash;307. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01460.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01460.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, L., \u0026amp; Wu, X. (2015). Effects of metalinguistic awareness on reading comprehension and the mediator role of reading fluency from grades 2 to 4. \u003cem\u003ePLoS One\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(3), e0114417. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114417\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1371/journal.pone.0114417\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLin, Y., Zhang, X., Huang, Q., Lv, L., Huang, A., Li, A., Wu, K., \u0026amp; Huang, Y. (2020). The prevalence of dyslexia in primary school children and their Chinese literacy assessment in Shantou, China. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(19), 7140. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197140\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/ijerph17197140\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu, P. D., \u0026amp; McBride-Chang, C. (2010). What is morphological awareness? Tapping lexical compounding awareness in Chinese third graders. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e102\u003c/em\u003e(1), 62\u0026ndash;73. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/a0016933\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/a0016933\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLyon, G. R., Shaywitz, S. E., \u0026amp; Shaywitz, B. A. (2003). A definition of dyslexia. \u003cem\u003eDyslexia\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;14. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-003-0001-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11881-003-0001-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoll, K., Ramus, F., Bartling, J., Bruder, J., Kunze, S., Neuhoff, N., \u0026amp; Landerl, K. (2014). Cognitive mechanisms underlying reading and spelling development in five European orthographies. \u003cem\u003eLearning and Instruction\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e, 65\u0026ndash;77. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j. learninstruc.2013.09.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNation, K., \u0026amp; Snowling, M. (1997). Assessing reading difficulties: The validity and utility of current measures of reading skill. \u003cem\u003eBritish Journal of Educational Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e67\u003c/em\u003e(3), 359\u0026ndash;370. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1997.tb01250.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.2044-8279.1997.tb01250.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNation, K. (2019). Children\u0026rsquo;s reading difficulties, language, and reflections on the simple view of reading. \u003cem\u003eAustralian Journal of Learning Difficulties\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(1), 47\u0026ndash;73. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2019.1609272\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/19404158.2019.1609272\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePan, J., McBride-Chang, C., Shu, H., Liu, H., Zhang, Y., \u0026amp; Li, H. (2011). What is in the naming? A 5-year longitudinal study of early rapid naming and phonological sensitivity in relation to subsequent reading skills in both native Chinese and English as a second language. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e103\u003c/em\u003e(4), 897\u0026ndash;908. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/a0024344\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/a0024344\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePennington, B. F. (2006). From single to multiple deficit models of developmental disorders. \u003cem\u003eCognition\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e101\u003c/em\u003e(2), 385\u0026ndash;413. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.04.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cognition.2006.04.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePerfetti, C., \u0026amp; Stafura, J. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. \u003cem\u003eScientific Studies of Reading\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(1), 22\u0026ndash;37. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10888438\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10888438\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. 2013. 827687.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQiao, S., Liu, Y., \u0026amp; Yeung, S. S. S. (2021). Mechanisms by which morphological awareness contributes to Chinese and English reading comprehension. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Reading\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(1), 189\u0026ndash;209. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12345\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1467-9817.12345\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRamus, F. (2003). Developmental dyslexia: Specific phonological deficits or general sensorimotor dysfunction? \u003cem\u003eCurrent Opinion in Neurology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(2), 212\u0026ndash;218. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00035-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00035-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuan, Y., Maurer, U., \u0026amp; McBride, C. (2024). Effectiveness of reading interventions on literacy skills for Chinese children with and without dyslexia: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. \u003cem\u003eEducational Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e36\u003c/em\u003e, 80. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09915-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10648-024-09915-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eScarborough, H. S. (1990). Very Early Language Deficits in Dyslexic Children. \u003cem\u003eChild Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e61\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1728\u0026ndash;1743. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb03562.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb03562.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShu, H., McBride-Chang, C., Wu, S., \u0026amp; Liu, H. (2006). Understanding Chinese developmental dyslexia: Morphological awareness as a core cognitive construct. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e98\u003c/em\u003e(1), 122\u0026ndash;133. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.122\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.122\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSnowling, M. J., \u0026amp; Hulme, C. (2012). Interventions for children\u0026rsquo;s language and literacy difficulties. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Language \u0026amp; Communication Disorders\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e47\u003c/em\u003e(1), 27\u0026ndash;34. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00081.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00081.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSolari, E. J., Grimm, R. P., McIntyre, N. S., \u0026amp; Denton, C. A. (2018). Reading comprehension development in at-risk vs. not at-risk first grade readers: The differential roles of listening comprehension, decoding, and fluency. \u003cem\u003eLearning and Individual Differences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e65\u003c/em\u003e, 195\u0026ndash;206. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.06.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.lindif.2018.06.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSong, S., Su, M., Kang, C., Liu, H., Zhang, Y., McBride\u0026ndash;Chang, C., et al. (2015). Tracing children\u0026rsquo;s vocabulary development from preschool through the school age years: An 8-year longitudinal study. \u003cem\u003eDevelopmental Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(1), 119\u0026ndash;131. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12190\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/desc.12190\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStein, J. (2019). The current status of the magnocellular theory of developmental dyslexia. \u003cem\u003eNeuropsychologia\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e130\u003c/em\u003e, 66\u0026ndash;77. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.03.022\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.03.022\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSwan, D., \u0026amp; Goswami, U. (1997). Phonological awareness deficits in developmental dyslexia and the phonological representations hypothesis. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Experimental Child Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e66\u003c/em\u003e(1), 18\u0026ndash;41. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1997.2375\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1006/jecp.1997.2375\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWen, H. (2005). 小学语文阅读能力测评量表的编制[Primary scholar\u0026rsquo;s Chinese reading ability scales development, validity, and reliability] (Master\u0026rsquo;s thesis). South China Normal University, Guangzhou.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWu, S., Shu, H., \u0026amp; Liu, Y. (2005). 语素意识在儿童汉语阅读中的作用[The role of morphological awareness in Chinese children reading]. \u003cem\u003eStudies of Psychology and Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(1), 35\u0026ndash;40.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXie, R., Zhang, J., Wu, X., \u0026amp; Nguyen, T. P. (2019). The relationship between morphological awareness and reading comprehension among Chinese children. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e, 54. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00054\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00054\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYeung, P., Ho, C. S., Chan, D. W., \u0026amp; Chung, K. K. (2014). -h. What are the early indicators of persistent word reading difficulties among Chinese readers in elementary grades? \u003cem\u003eDyslexia\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(2), 119\u0026ndash;145. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1471\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/dys.1471\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang, Y., Dong, Q., Shu, H., \u0026amp; Wu, Y. (2017). 语音意识、命名速度和语素意识在汉语阅读发展中的作用[The roles of phonological awareness, naming speed, and morphological awareness in Chinese reading development]. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Development and Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(4), 401\u0026ndash;409. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2017.04.03\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2017.04.03\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang, H., \u0026amp; Wang, X. (1985). \u003cem\u003eRaven\u0026rsquo;s IQ reasoning standardized test\u003c/em\u003e. Department of Psychology, Beijing Normal University.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhao, Y., Wu, X., Sun, P., Xie, R., Feng, J., \u0026amp; Chen, H. (2019). The relationship between morphological awareness and reading comprehension among Chinese children: Evidence from multiple mediation models. \u003cem\u003eLearning and Individual Differences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e72\u003c/em\u003e, 59\u0026ndash;68. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.04.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.lindif.2019.04.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"developmental dyslexia, cognitive-linguistic skills, vocabulary knowledge, reading comprehension","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7278840/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7278840/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eReading is a foundational skill essential for academic achievement and lifelong learning, and primary school is a critical period for its development. Reading comprehension, as the ultimate goal of reading, depends on language-related cognitive-linguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge. However, how these components interact\u0026mdash;and whether their contributions differ between typically developing children and those with developmental dyslexia (DD)\u0026mdash;remains unclear.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study examined 111 Chinese children with DD and 111 age-matched typically developing children (CA group), identified using an ability\u0026ndash;achievement discrepancy model. Cognitive-linguistic skills (phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and rapid automatized naming), vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and reading comprehension were assessed. Group comparisons were conducted, and hierarchical regression and structural equation modeling were used to explore the direct and indirect pathways contributing to reading comprehension.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResults revealed that children with DD performed significantly worse than their CA peers in all measured domains. For typically developing children, cognitive-linguistic skills contributed to reading comprehension indirectly through vocabulary knowledge and reading fluency. In contrast, among children with DD, morphological awareness had both direct and indirect effects on reading comprehension.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings suggest that while language-related cognitive skills and vocabulary knowledge are important for reading development in all children, the underlying mechanisms differ. Reading comprehension in typically developing children relies more on vocabulary knowledge and fluency, whereas children with DD depend more directly on morphological processing. These insights have practical implications for designing targeted reading interventions for Chinese children with reading difficulties.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Differential Contributions of Cognitive-Linguistic Skills and Vocabulary Knowledge to Reading Comprehension in Chinese Children With and Without Developmental Dyslexia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-08-20 06:41:43","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7278840/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"87af2584-453a-4305-bab4-20f69d465203","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 20th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-10-02T15:08:37+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-08-20 06:41:43","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7278840","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7278840","identity":"rs-7278840","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}