{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: The jingle fallacy in comprehension tests for reading.
{Author}: Lee CE;Godwin HJ;Drieghe D;
{Journal}: PLoS One
{Volume}: 19
{Issue}: 7
{Year}: 2024
{Factor}: 3.752
{DOI}: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306466
{Abstract}: The Jingle fallacy is the false assumption that instruments which share the same name measure the same underlying construct. In this experiment, we focus on the comprehension subtests of the Nelson Denny Reading Test (NDRT) and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT-II). 91 university students read passages for comprehension whilst their eye movements were recorded. Participants took part in two experimental blocks of which the order was counterbalanced, one with higher comprehension demands and one with lower comprehension demands. We assumed that tests measuring comprehension would be able to predict differences observed in eye movement patterns as a function of varying comprehension demands. Overall, readers were able to adapt their reading strategy to read more slowly, making more and longer fixations, coupled with shorter saccades when comprehension demands were higher. Within an experimental block, high scorers on the NDRT were able to consistently increase their pace of reading over time for both higher and lower comprehension demands, whereas low scorers approached a threshold where they could not continue to increase their reading speed or further reduce the number of fixations to read a text, even when comprehension demands were low. Individual differences based on the WIAT-II did not explain similar patterns. The NDRT comprehension test was therefore more predictive of differences in the reading patterns of skilled adult readers in response to comprehension demands than the WIAT-II (which also suffered from low reliability). Our results revealed that these different comprehension measures should not be used interchangeably, and researchers should be cautious when choosing reading comprehension tests for research.