Retell is used widely as a measure of reading comprehension. In this meta-analysis, we evaluated the relation between retell and other measures of reading comprehension among students in Grades 1-12. Data from 23 studies (82 effect sizes; N = 4,705 participants) showed a moderate relation between retell and other measures of reading comprehension, r = .46. Moderation analyses revealed that the relation was stronger when reading comprehension was measured by cloze or maze tasks than when measured using a multiple-choice format. In addition, the relation was weaker in higher grades, but this was largely explained by text genre or the number of prompts in retell. The relation between 'oral' retell and reading comprehension was stronger with a greater number of prompts provided during retell tests. In contrast, results did not differ by other features of retell such as reading mode (oral or silent), text genres of retell (narrative or informational), or use of different oral retell evaluation methods (e.g., number of words or ideas, overall quality). Overall, the results indicate a moderate relation, on average, between retell and other measures of reading comprehension. However, the moderate magnitude indicates caution for using retell as the sole measure of reading comprehension. The results also indicate a need for a better understanding about more systematic approaches to retell assessment (e.g., number and kind of prompts in the case of oral retell) as a measure of reading comprehension.

中文翻译：

---

复述是阅读理解的有效衡量标准吗？


复述被广泛用作阅读理解的衡量标准。在这项荟萃分析中，我们评估了 1-12 年级学生的复述与其他阅读理解指标之间的关系。 23 项研究的数据（82 个效应大小；N = 4,705 名参与者）显示复述与其他阅读理解测量之间存在中等关系，r = 0.46。调节分析表明，通过完形填空或迷宫任务测量阅读理解时，这种关系比使用多项选择格式测量时的关系更强。此外，这种关系在高年级中较弱，但这很大程度上是由文本类型或复述中的提示数量来解释的。在复述测试期间提供的提示越多，“口头”复述和阅读理解之间的关系就越紧密。相比之下，结果并没有因复述的其他特征而有所不同，例如阅读模式（口头或无声）、复述的文本类型（叙述性或信息性）或使用不同的口头复述评估方法（例如，单词或想法的数量，总体质量）。总体而言，结果表明，平均而言，复述与其他阅读理解指标之间存在中等关系。然而，中等程度表明谨慎使用复述作为阅读理解的唯一衡量标准。结果还表明需要更好地理解更系统的复述评估方法（例如，口头复述情况下提示的数量和种类）作为阅读理解的衡量标准。