ABSTRACT Wybrow & Hanley (2015) reported that proportions of phonological and surface dyslexics change depending on how control groups are selected. This observation questions the appropriateness of the reading-level match design for establishing causality in cognitive studies of reading. Here, I focus on three features: (1) the lack of an explicit definition of the reading-level concept; (2) the metric problems associated with using this design; and (3) the ambiguity of the delay-deviance contrast in interpreting reading deficits. I also delineate alternative methodological features that could effectively inform developmental designs. Thus, I argue that (a) control variables should be as independent of the target-dependent measure as possible; (b) they should be shaped within the theoretical aims of the study and be explicitly considered in the interpretation of findings; and, (c) conditions of interest should be viewed along with critically associated conditions using approaches that allow predicting the size of the expected deficit..

中文翻译：

---

阅读水平匹配设计：限制和可能的替代方案

摘要 Wybrow & Hanley (2015) 报告说，语音和表面阅读障碍的比例会根据对照组的选择方式而变化。这一观察结果质疑阅读水平匹配设计在阅读认知研究中建立因果关系的适当性。在这里，我主要关注三个特点：（1）缺乏对阅读层面概念的明确定义；(2) 与使用此设计相关的度量问题；(3)延迟-偏差对比在解释阅读缺陷时的模糊性。我还描述了可以有效地为开发设计提供信息的替代方法论特征。因此，我认为 (a) 控制变量应该尽可能独立于目标相关的度量；(b) 它们应在研究的理论目标内形成，并在解释结果时明确考虑；(c) 应使用允许预测预期赤字规模的方法将感兴趣的条件与关键相关的条件一起查看。