Revisiting the Relations Between the WJ-IV Measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Cognitive Abilities and Reading Achievement During the School-Age Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined associations between broad cognitive abilities (Fluid Reasoning [Gf], Short-Term Working Memory [Gwm], Long-Term Storage and Retrieval [Glr], Processing Speed [Gs], Comprehension-Knowledge [Gc], Visual Processing [Gv], and Auditory Processing [Ga]) and reading achievement (Basic Reading Skills, Reading Rate, Reading Fluency, and Reading Comprehension) in a nationally representative school-age sample. Findings indicate that some cognitive abilities were stronger predictors of reading achievement than previously found (e.g., Gf, Ga, and Gs). Most notably, the Woodcock-Johnson–IV Gf cluster was found to be the strongest and most consistent predictor of reading achievement. A secondary analysis suggests that this effect was likely due to the new Number Series test. The results of the study suggest revisions to previous conceptualizations of the associations between the broad Cattell-Horn-Carroll abilities and areas of reading achievement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".