Abstract

The purpose of this study is to test the effect of sustained attention's mediating role on the impact of rapid automatized naming ability on reading comprehension. The participants in the study consisted of 56 third-grade elementary school students. Of the participants, 53.57% were female (n=30) and 46.43% were male (n=26). The age range of the students, who are from the same school and similar socioeconomic backgrounds, varies between 8.24 and 8.77 (x ̅=8.41, SD= 0.19). The native language of all students participating in the study is Turkish. A structural equation model was used to analyze the data obtained in the study. SPSS 24 was used for the necessary analyses in the study, namely correlation and Sobel z-test, while SmartPLS 4 was used for the mediation test and the equality model. The results of the study show that there is a significant relationship between the sub-dimensions of rapid automatized naming (object, color, letter), reading comprehension, and sustained attention, while there is no significant relationship between reading comprehension and number naming. Another result of the study is that rapid automatized naming has a direct (β=-.19, t=3.22, p<.05) and indirect (β=-.18) effect on reading comprehension. The direct relationship between rapid automatized naming and reading comprehension was found to be significant when the mediating variable was not included in the model. However, when the mediating variable of sustained attention was added to the model, this direct effect became insignificant. Therefore, it was concluded that sustained attention complately mediated this effect.

Keywords: Rapid automatized naming, Reading comprehension, Sustained attention, Curriculum-based assessment

References

  1. Abolafya, P. B. (2008). Rapid-automatized naming in relation to some other reading components and reading skills of second graders (Thesis No. 231942) [Master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  2. Akyol, H. (2019). Programa uygun Türkçe öğretim yöntemleri (9th ed.). Pegem Akademi. https://doi.org/10.14527/9786053640011
  3. Albayrak, Ş. (2023). 60-90 ay arası konuşma sesi bozukluğu olan ve olmayan çocukların çalışma belleği, hızlı isimlendirme ve fonolojik farkındalık becerilerinin incelenmesi (Thesis No. 817410) [Master’s thesis, Üsküdar University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  4. Alloway, T. P., Wootan, S. S., & Deane, P. (2014). Investigating working memory and sustained attention in dyslexic adults. International Journal of Educational Research, (67), 11-17. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.04.001
  5. Altani, A., Protopapas, A., & Georgiou, G. K. (2017). The contribution of executive functions to naming digits, objects, and words. Reading and Writing, 30(1), 121-141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9666-4
  6. Alvarado, C. (2023). Exploring the effects of early childhood adversity and sustained attention on reading outcomes [Master Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University]. https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/catalog/29740cva5436
  7. Araújo, S., Reis, A., Petersson, K. M., & Faísca, L. (2015). Rapid automatized naming and reading performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(3), 868-883. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000006
  8. Arnell, K. M., Joanisse, M. F., Klein, R. M., Busseri, M. A., & Tannock, R. (2009). Decomposing the relation between Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) and reading ability. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 63(3), 173-184. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015721
  9. Arrington, C. N., Kulesz, P. A., Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., & Barnes, M. A. (2014). The contribution of attentional control and working memory to reading comprehension and decoding. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(5), 325-346. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2014.902461
  10. Ateşman, E. (1997). Türkçede okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi Dil Dergisi, (58), 171-174.
  11. Aydın, G., & Demirel, T. (2010). İlköğretim Türkçe 3. ders ve öğrenci çalışma kitabı. Kelebek Matbaacılık.
  12. Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2
  13. Bakır, F. H. (2007). Development of the rapid automatized naming tests (Thesis No. 220823) [Master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  14. Bizama, M., & Chávez, Y. (2023). Cognitive processes and reading comprehension of expository texts in Chilean secondary students. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 21(1), 125-146. https://doi.org/10.25115/ejrep.v21i59.5180
  15. Bozan, A., & Akay, Y. (2012). The effect of attention improvement training on the primary school 5th grade students' skills of gathering attention. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(6), 53-66.
  16. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Pegem Akademi.
  17. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2017). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (23rd ed.). Pegem Akademi. https://doi.org/10.14527/9789944919289
  18. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th ed.). Routledge Falmer.
  19. Connor, C. M. (2016). A lattice model of the development of reading comprehension. Child Development Perspectives, 10(4), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12200
  20. de Jong, P. F. (2011). What discrete and serial rapid automatized naming can reveal about reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(4), 314-337. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2010.485624
  21. Demirtaş, Ç. P. (2017). Okuma güçlüğü olan öğrencilerde okuma, sesbilgisel farkındalık, hızlı isimlendirme ve çalışma belleği becerilerinin incelenmesi (Thesis No. 456695) [Master’s thesis, Ankara University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  22. Ellez, A. M. (2014). Ölçme araçlarında bulunması gereken özellikler. In A. Tanrıöğen (Ed.), Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (4th ed., pp. 167-190). Anı Yayıncılık.
  23. Ergül, C., & Demir, E. (2022). Anasınıfından dördüncü sınıfa kadar olan çocuklar için geliştirilmiş Hızlı İsimlendirme Testi’nin geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Trakya Eğitim Dergisi, 12(1), 176-192. https://doi.org/10.24315/tred.883688
  24. Furnes, B., & Samuelsson, S. (2011). Phonological awareness and rapid automatized naming predicting early development in reading and spelling: Results from a cross-linguistic longitudinal study. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(1), 85-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.10.005
  25. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2001). Spss for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference 10.0 update (3th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
  26. Georgiou, G. K., Parrila, R., & Kirby, J. R. (2009). RAN components and reading development from Grade 3 to Grade 5: What underlies their relationship?. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13(6), 508-534. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430903034796
  27. Georgiou, G. K., Parrila, R., & Papadopoulos, T. C. (2008). Predictors of word decoding and reading fluency across languages varying in orthographic consistency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 566-580. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.566
  28. Georgiou, G. K., Parrila, R., & Papadopoulos, T. C. (2016). The anatomy of the RAN-reading relationship. Reading and Writing, (29), 1793-1815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9653-9
  29. IBM Corp. (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version 24.0) [Computer software]. IBM Corp.
  30. Karadağ, Ö., Keskin, H. K., & Arı, G. (2019). Mediatory effect of reading skill in the rapid automatized naming/reading comprehension relationship. Education and Science, 44(197), 353-366. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2019.7684
  31. Karaduman, B. D. (2004). Dikkat toplama eğitim programının ilköğretim 4. ve 5. sınıf öğrencilerinin dikkat toplama düzeyi, benlik algısı ve başarı düzeylerine etkisi (Thesis No. 205199) [Doctoral dissertation, Ankara University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  32. Karasar, N. (2007). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi (17th ed.). Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  33. Kirby, J. R., Parrila, R. K., & Pfeiffer, S. L. (2003). Naming speed and phonological awareness as predictors of reading development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 453-464. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.3.453
  34. Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
  35. Landerl, K., Freudenthaler, H. H., Heene, M., De Jong, P. F., Desrochers, A., Manolitsis, G., Parrila, R., & Georgiou, G. K. (2019). Phonological awareness and rapid automatized naming as longitudinal predictors of reading in five alphabetic orthographies with varying degrees of consistency. Scientific Studies of Reading, 23(3), 220-234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2018.1510936
  36. Lervag, A., & Hulme, C. (2009). Rapid automatized naming (RAN) taps a mechanism that places constraints on the development of early reading fluency. Psychological Sciences, 20(8), 1040-1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02405.x
  37. Li, J. J., Cutting, L. E., Ryan, M., Zilioli, M., Denckla, M. B., & Mahone, E. M. (2009). Response variability in rapid automatized naming predicts reading comprehension. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 31(7), 877-888. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390802646973
  38. Li, M., Kirby, J., & Georgiou, G. K. (2011). Rapid naming speed components and reading comprehension in bilingual children. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(1), 6-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01476.x
  39. Litt, D. (2010). Do children selected for reading recovery exhibit weaknesses in phonological awareness and rapid automatic naming?. Literacy Teaching and Learning, 14(1&2), 89-102.
  40. Macdonald, K. T., Barnes, M. A., Miciak, J., Roberts, G., Halverson, K. K., Vaughn, S., & Cirino, P. T. (2021). Sustained attention and behavioral ratings of attention in struggling readers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 25(5), 436-451. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2020.1826950
  41. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819.004
  42. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage Publishing.
  43. Norton, E. S., & Wolf, M. (2012). Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) and reading fluency: Implications for understanding and treatment of reading disabilities. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 427-452. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100431
  44. Ozernov‐Palchik, O., Norton, E. S., Sideridis, G., Beach, S. D., Wolf, M., Gabrieli, J. D., & Gaab, N. (2017). Longitudinal stability of pre‐reading skill profiles of kindergarten children: Implications for early screening and theories of reading. Developmental Science, 20(5), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12471
  45. Öksüz, H. İ., & Akyol, H. (2023). The effect of prior knowledge, verbal working memory and attention skills on reading comprehension skills. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(3), 893-907. https://doi.org/10.31592/aeusbed.1362041
  46. Öksüz, H. İ., & Akyol, H. (2024). Effect of reciprocal teaching on comprehension, attention, rapid naming and working memory. Turkish Journal of Education, 13(3), 180-198. https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.1453025
  47. Özata, H., & Haznedar, B. (2018). İlköğretim ikinci sınıfta akıcı sözcük okuma ve okuduğunu anlamayı etkileyen faktörler. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi, 35(2), 1-34. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/buje/article/551886
  48. Razza, R. A., Martin, A., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2012). The implications of early attentional regulation for school success among low-income children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 311-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2012.07.005
  49. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2024). SmartPLS 4 [Computer software]. SmartPLS. https://www.smartpls.com
  50. Samuels, S. J. (2006). Reading fluency: Its past, present, and future. In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 3-16). The Guilford Press.
  51. Savage, R., & Frederickson, N. (2005). Evidence of a highly specific relationship between rapid automatic naming of digits and text-reading speed. Brain and Language, 93(2), 152-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.09.005
  52. Saydam, E. N. (2020). Birinci sınıfta okuma-yazma başarısını etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi (Thesis No. 637889) [Master’s thesis, İstanbul University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  53. Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories an educational perspective (6th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
  54. Shelleby, E. C., & Ogg, J. (2020). Longitudinal relationships between parent involvement, parental warmth, ADHD symptoms, and reading achievement. Journal of Attention Disorders, 24(5), 737-749. https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547198590
  55. Smallwood, J., McSpadden, M., & Schooler, J. W. (2008). When attention matters: The curious incident of the wandering mind. Memory & Cognition, 36(6), 1144-1150. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.6.1144
  56. Stern, P., & Shalev, L. (2013). The role of sustained attention and display medium in reading comprehension among adolescents with ADHD and without it. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(1), 431-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.08.021
  57. Taub, G. E., & Szente, J. (2012). The impact of rapid automatized naming and phonological awareness on the reading fluency of a minority student population. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 26(4), 359-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2012.712084
  58. Tighe, E. L., & Schatschneider, C. (2016). Examining the relationships of component reading skills to reading comprehension in struggling adult readers: A meta-analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(4), 395-409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219414555415
  59. Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Alexander, A. W. (2001). Principles of fluency instruction in reading: Relationships with established empirical outcomes. In M. Wolf (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, & the brain (pp. 333-355). York Press.
  60. Van den Bos, K. P., Zijlstra, B. J., & lutje Spelberg, H. C. (2002). Life-span data on continuous-naming speeds of numbers, letters, colors, and pictured objects, and word-reading speed. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6(1), 25-49. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532799XSSR0601_02
  61. Varizo, S., Correa, J., Mousinho, R., & Navas, A. L. (2022). The contribution of rapid automatized naming with reading rate and text comprehension in Brazilian elementary school children. Audiology-Communication Research, (27), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-6431-2022-2641en
  62. Veeravagu, J. V. J., Muthusamy, C., Marimuthu, R., & Michael, A. S. (2010). Using Bloom’s taxonomy to gauge students’ reading comprehension performance. Canadian Social Science, 6(3), 205-212.
  63. Warmington, M., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phoneme awareness, visual-verbal paired associate learning, and rapid automatized naming as predictors of individual differences in reading ability. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2010.534832
  64. Weng, X., Li, G., & Li, R. (2016). Mediating effects of working memory in the relation between rapid automatized naming and Chinese reading comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 45(4), 945-959. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-015-9385-z
  65. Wolf, M., & Bowers, P. G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 415-438. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415
  66. Wolf, M., & Denckla, M. B. (2005). RAN/RAS: Rapid automatized naming and rapid alternating stimulus tests. PRO-ED.
  67. Wolf, M., Bowers, P. G., & Biddle, K. (2000). Naming-speed processes, timing, and reading: A conceptual review. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(4), 387-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300409
  68. Yeung, S. S., (2016). Relationship between rapid automatized naming and reading: A longitudinal study on bilingual children. Reading Psychology, 37(8), 1196-1211. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2016.1193582
  69. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9th ed.). Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  70. Yıldız, M., & Çetinkaya, E. (2017). The Relationship between good readers' sttention, reading fluency and reading comprehension. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(3), 366-371. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050309

Copyright and license

Copyright © 2026 The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite

Öksüz, H. İ., Yaşartürk, İ., Elalmış, S., Çetinkaya, F. Ç., & Keskin, H. K. (2026). The effect of rapid automatized naming ability in elementary school on reading comprehension: the mediating role of sustained attention. Education and Science, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.15390/ES.2025.2542