Developmental Psychology Copyright 1994 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.

1994, Vol. 30, No. 6, 949-954 0012-1649/94/S3.00

Processing Speed, Naming Speed, and Reading

Robert Kail and Lynda K. Hall

With increasing age, children name familiar objects more rapidly, and these naming times are related
to reading ability. The aim of this research was to determine if age-related change in naming time
reflects (a) automatic access of familiar names due to greater familiarity with the named objects or
(b) global change in speed of processing. To distinguish these explanations, 144 8- to 13-year-olds
were administered measures of global processing time, naming time, and reading ability. Results of
path analyses and structural-equation modeling were consistent with the second explanation. That
is, naming time was predicted by measures of processing speed but not by age. In addition, naming
time was linked to reading recognition, which was linked to reading comprehension. Age was also
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

linked to reading recognition, indicating that other age-related variables need to be incorporated
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

into the causal model.

As children develop, they process information more rapidly.
For example, 4-year-olds process information about three times
more slowly than adults, whereas 8-year-olds process informa-
tion twice as slowly as adults. This pattern of change is found
across a wide range of perceptual and cognitive tasks, which
seems to indicate that a common, global mechanism is respon-
sible for age-related change in speed of information processing.
That is, some global mechanism changes with age, thereby in-
creasing the speed with which children and adolescents process
information (Hale, Fry, & Jessie, 1993; Kail, 1991a).
The impact of age-related change in processing speed is espe-
cially salient on tasks in which response time is measured, but
it need not be restricted to those tasks. Speed of processing may
influence performance whenever a number of activities must be
completed in afixedperiod. In these instances, slow processing
speed may result in reduced performance because children or
adolescents cannot complete the necessary components of task
performance in the time allotted. Thus, the basic claim is that
(a) processing speed becomes more rapid with age, reflecting
changing limits of the global mechanism, which means that (b)
processes responsible for performance on a particular task are
executed more rapidly and are more likely to be completed in a
limited period of time, resulting in (c) superior performance.
Evidence for this line of reasoning comes from recent studies
of the relation between memory span and processing speed.
Age-related change in memory span is linked to age-related in-
creases in articulation rate, which reflect the rate with which
information is refreshed in the articulatory rehearsal loop of
Robert Kail, Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue Univer-
sity; Lynda K. Hall, Department of Psychology, Ohio Wesleyan
University.
This research was supported by Grant HD 19947 from the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development. We wish to thank
Nicole Antonelli, Phillip Bower, Leah Burgy, Laura Curry, Greg Fore-
man, Diane Gordon, Stacia Groover, and Wei-Ling Poon for testing
subjects.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Rob-
ert Kail, Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University,
West Lafayette, Indiana 47907.
949
working memory (e.g., Hitch, Halliday, & Littler, 1989). That
is, older children have greater memory spans because they ar-
ticulate stimuli more rapidly, which increases the probability
that information is retained in the articulatory loop. A more
general view would be that articulation rate reflects global de-
velopmental change in processing speed. That is, increased pro-
cessing speed would yield more rapid articulation, which, in
turn, would yield more accurate retention.
Links between processing speed, articulation rate, and mem-
ory have been evaluated in several experiments (e.g., Kail, 1992;
Kail & Park, 1994) that involved assessment of processing
speed, rate of articulation, and memory span. In each case, path
analyses revealed that age was associated with increased speed
of processing, which was associated with more rapid articula-
tion and greater memory span. Thus, these findings indicate the
influence of processing speed on memory tasks that lack an ob-
vious speeded element.
The aim of the present research was to examine another do-
main that may be influenced by age-related change in speed of
processing. Several investigators have reported that the speed
with which children name familiar objects is a potent predictor
of reading skill. Wolf, Bally, and Morris (1986), for example,
reported a correlation of .66 between the speed with which kin-
dergarten children named familiar letters and digits and their
performance on a word recognition task in Grade 2. Wolf et al.'s
measure of word recognition was the speed with which children
read lists of words and pseudowords, but the same relation is
obtained when word recognition is assessed with untimed tasks.
Spring and Davis (1988), for example, reported a correlation of
.50 between the speed with which children named digits and
their scores on the Reading Recognition subtest of the Peabody
Individualized Achievement Test (PIAT), in which children
read aloud individual words. That is, children who named digits
more rapidly typically read correctly more words than did chil-
dren who named digits slowly. The correlation between digit
naming speed and scores on the Reading Comprehension sub-
test of the PIAT was .23, but this correlation was attributable
entirely to the variance that these measures shared with Read-
ing Recognition scores. That is, the correlation between naming
speed and comprehension approximated zero with reading
 950 ROBERT KAIL AND LYNDA K. HALL
Model 1
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Model 2
Model 3
Figure I. Three models of possible causal connections between age,
global speed of processing, naming time, reading recognition, and read-
ing comprehension. Model 1 includes all possible links between the con-
structs. According to Model 2, processing speed has no influence on
naming time or reading but age is linked to reading recognition and to
naming time, which are also linked to reading recognition. According to
Model 3, age-related increases in processing speed are linked to reading
recognition, which is linked to comprehension; in addition, age is linked
to reading recognition.
recognition partialed out. In summary, rapid naming of digits
predicted word recognition, which predicted comprehension.
Spring and Davis (1988), like others before them (e.g., Wolf
et ah, 1986), believed that "continuous digit naming speed is an
index of the automaticity with which letter codes are accessed
in memory, and that automatization of this process is a prereq-
uisite for the accurate performance of certain other higher level
reading processes" (p. 330). Thus, their interpretation was that
children who name digits rapidly are doing so because they are
accessing name codes automatically, that these children are
more likely to recognize words automatically, and that, as a con-
sequence, they better understand what they read. An alternative
interpretation is that global developmental change in speed of
processing is implicated in performance on tasks involving
rapid naming of familiar stimuli such as digits and letters. Ac-
cess to name codes for digits, letters, and colors may become
more rapid with age simply because age-related change in the
global mechanism speeds retrieval, not because access to name
codes is automatic.
Figure 1 illustrates the contrasts between these two views. In
both views, rapid naming predicts word recognition, which, in
turn, should predict comprehension. The views differ in the an-
tecedents of rapid naming. On the basis of research on age-re-
lated change in speed of processing, measures of global process-
ing speed should predict rapid naming; that is, more rapid nam-
ing is simply one more manifestation of age-related change in
processing speed. In contrast, if rapid naming reflects auto-
matic access to characters, measures of global processing speed
need not predict naming speed because automaticity is based
on an individual's experience. Instead, age, as a proxy for age-
related accumulation of reading-relevant experience, should
predict naming time, but processing speed should not.
The study reported here was designed to evaluate the model
depicted in Figure 1, within a path analytic framework similar
to that used in the studies on memory (Kail, 1992; Kail & Park,
1994). Measures of processing speed, naming speed, and read-
ing skill were administered to 8- through 13-year-olds. On the
basis of previous work, we expected that age would be associ-
ated with speed of processing (Path 1) and that naming time
would be linked to word recognition (Path 8), which would be
linked to reading comprehension (Path 10). Of critical interest
were Paths 2, 5, 6, and 7 of Figure 1. If the relation between
naming speed and word recognition reflects age-related accu-
mulation of reading-relevant experience, which results in auto-
matic access to name codes for digits, letters, and the like, then
the coefficient for Path 2 should be significant. If, instead, the
naming speed and word recognition link reflects age-related
change in global speed of processing, then the coefficient for
Path 5 should be significant. Finally, the coefficients for Paths
6 and 7 are also of interest; significant coefficients here would
indicate that age-related change in speed of processing facili-
tates reading in ways other than more rapid lexical access.
Method
Subjects
We tested 12boysand 12girlsat 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 years of age.
All resided in one of two small towns in the midwestern United States.
The children were recruited through advertisements in school newslet-
ters or local newspapers and through letters to parents; they were paid
$4. The mean ages of the children were 8.37, 9.44, 10.43, 11.34, 12.36,
and 13.34 years.
 PROCESSING SPEED AND READING 951

Table 1
Correlations Between Measures
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Age _
2. Coding -.53 —
3. Visual Matching -.68 .66 —
4. Cross-Out -.66 .64 .79 —
5. Naming Digits -.51 .63 .71 .66 —
6. Naming Letters -.56 .60 .75 .66 .88 —
7. Naming Colors -.51 .63 .69 .61 .80 .79 —
8. PIAT Reading Recognition .71 -.46 -.73 -.63 -.62 -.69 -.57 —
9. PIAT Reading Comprehension .64 -.41 -.62 -.55 -.54 -.60 -.53 .84 —
M 130.40 70.67 41.92 21.69 22.99 23.02 36.03 73.24 76.39
SD 20.54 17.46 6.88 4.26 5.42 5.23 9.50 14.26 13.11
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Note. N = 144. All correlations are significant at p < .05. Age is expressed in months, coding and naming times in seconds, and Visual Matching
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

and Cross-Out in number correct. PIAT scores are raw scores. Signs for correlations involving Visual Matching and Cross-Out have been reversed
for consistency with the remaining speeded tasks. PIAT = Peabody Individualized Achievement Test.

Tasks
Processing speed was measured with three tasks. The Coding task
from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Revised was used
because performance on this task (a) changes exponentially at the same
rate as performance on speeded experimental tasks that were used to
establish the presence of global change in processing speed (Kail, 1991b)
and (b) is correlated substantially with other measures of perceptual
speed (Kail, 1992). In this task, five geometric figures appeared at the
top of the page, each with distinctive lines in the interior (e.g., single
vertical line inside a star). The remainder of the page included 50 geo-
metricfigures;the subject's task was to draw the correct interior lines,
using the code that appeared at the top of the page. After the aim of the
task was explained, subjects solved thefirstfiveproblems for practice.
They then solved the remaining problems in order, as rapidly as possi-
ble, but not so quickly that they erred. The experimenter recorded the
amount of time required for subjects to complete the remaining 45
problems.
The other two measures of processing time were the Visual Matching
and Cross-Out tasks, both from the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cog-
nitive Ability. The tasks were chosen because they were devised initially
to assess the processing speed factor in the theory offluidand crystal-
lized intelligence (Cattell, 1963; Horn, 1985). In the Visual Matching
task, each of 60 rows includes six digits, two of which are identical (e.g.,
8 9 5 2 9 7); the subject circles the identical digits. The performance
measure is the number of rows completed correctly in 3 min. In the
Cross-Out task, each of 30 rows consists of a geometricfigureat the left
end of a row and 19 similarfiguresto the right. One row, for example,
consists of a triangle enclosing a single dot; the 19figuresare triangles
with various objects in the interior (e.g., a single dot, three dots, a plus,
and a square). The child places a line through the 5figuresof the 19
that are identical to the one at the left. The performance measure is the
number of rows completed in 3 min.
Naming time was assessed with three types of stimuli used by previ-
ous investigators (e.g., Wolf et al., 1986), namely, digits, letters, and col-
ors. In each case, children first practiced naming 15 exemplars of the
stimuli. Then they were shown a page with 50 stimuli arranged in 10
rows of 5 stimuli. The experimenter recorded the amount of time re-
quired for the child to name all 50 stimuli and noted any naming errors.
The Reading Recognition and Reading Comprehension tasks of the
PIAT were administered, according to standard procedures. In the for-
mer, the child reads individual words aloud; in the latter, the child reads
a sentence silently, then points to one of four pictures that corresponds
to the meaning of the sentence.
Procedure
Testing took place in quiet rooms in our laboratories at Purdue Uni-
versity and Ohio Wesleyan University. All tasks were presented in a sin-
gle session that lasted about 45 min for the youngest children and about
35 min for the oldest. Tasks were presented in the following constant
order: Visual Matching, naming digits, Coding, naming letters, Cross-
Out, naming colors, Reading Recognition, and Reading Comprehen-
sion. (Order of tasks was not counterbalanced across subjects so that
individual differences would not be confounded with differences in task
order.)
Results
Shown in Table 1 are correlations for age, measures of pro-
cessing time, naming time, and reading. There are several fea-
tures of interest in these results: (a) Age is correlated negatively
with performance on the timed tasks but positively with the
reading measures; (b) processing time measures are related to
one another, as are the naming time measures; (c) reading scores
are correlated negatively with performance on timed tasks; and
(d) processing times and naming times are correlated positively.
Correlations were also computed between the variables listed
in Table 1 and the site of testing (Indiana and Ohio). The corre-
lation between site and grade, .15, was marginally significant (p
< . 10) and reflected the fact that more children in higher grades
were tested in Ohio. However, site was not correlated with any
of the performance measures.
Causal modeling techniques were the primary methods of
data analysis. The general aim of this approach was to deter-
mine if the observed pattern of correlations is consistent with a
specified set of structural relations among the variables. For
each proposed relation (i.e., a path in Figure 1), a coefficient is
estimated that expresses the change in standard deviation units
of one variable that is associated with a change of one standard
deviation in a second variable. Coefficients that are significantly
greater than zero provide evidence for the hypothesized relation
between the variables.
Path coefficients were estimated in two ways. In the first, we
used beta weights obtained from multiple regression analyses to
estimate path coefficients. The drawback to this approach was
 952 ROBERT KAIL AND LYNDA K. HALL
Table 2
Correlations Between Age, Speed Composite, Naming Time
Composite, and Reading Scores
Variable 1 2 3 4
1. Age — if naming times reflected age-related reading experience that
2. Processing speed composite -.70 — results in automatic access to codes for familiar stimuli.
3. Naming time composite -.56 .79 — Finally, the link between age and recognition (Path 3) was
4. PIAT Reading Recognition .71 -.68 -.67
5. PIAT Reading Comprehension .64 -.59 -.59 .84
Note. N = 144. All correlations are significant at p < .01. PIAT
Peabody Individualized Achievement Test.
that it provided no index of the overall adequacy of the concep-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
tual model. Consequently, we used a second approach. In struc-
tural-equation modeling, composite measures were created for
each of the constructs of interest and a model was created that
posited causal links between these constructs. We then used
least squares and maximum likelihood techniques to evaluate
both the significance of individual paths and the overall ade-
quacy of the model.
In the initial analyses, we used multiple regression to estimate
coefficients for the paths shown in Figure 1, using composite
scores for the processing and naming times. In both cases, com-
posite measures were created by taking the average of the stan-
dard scores for the three constituent measures. For example, to
determine the composite naming time score, we converted each
individual's raw scores on the three naming tasks (naming dig-
its, letters, and colors) to standard scores (based on the means
and standard deviations of the entire sample) and averaged
them. Shown in Table 2 are correlations between age, the com-
posite measures, and reading scores. Age is correlated positively
with both reading scores but correlated negatively with the pro-
cessing and naming time composites.
Paths 4, 7, 9, and 10 were estimated from a multiple regres-
sion analysis in which age, processing time, naming time, and
reading recognition were used to predict comprehension; Paths
3, 6, and 8 were estimated from a multiple regression analysis
in which age, processing time, and naming time were used to
predict reading recognition; Paths 2 and 5 were estimated from
a multiple regression analysis in which age and processing speed
were used to predict naming time; and Path 1 was estimated
from a multiple regression analysis in which age was used to
predict processing speed.
R2s for these regression analyses are shown in Table 3; in all
cases, the independent variables accounted for significant and
substantial variance in the dependent variable. As shown in Ta-
ble 4, coefficients for Paths 1, 3, 5, 8, and 10 were significant.
Three of these coefficients replicate previousfindings.The link
between age and processing time (Path 1) replicates findings
from the studies that examined relations between processing
speed and memory (Kail, 1992; Kail & Park, 1994). In addition,
the significant coefficient for Paths 8 and 10, along with the non-
significant coefficient for Path 9, replicates the findings of
Spring and Davis (1988). Naming times predicted reading rec-
ognition, which predicted comprehension, but naming time did
not predict comprehension.
The significant coefficient for Path 5 and the nonsignificant
coefficient for Path 2 bear directly on the issue that motivated
the study. Naming times were predicted by processing speed
times (Path 5), as would be predicted by the view that naming
times are limited by the global mechanism. However, naming
times were not predicted by age (Path 2), as would be expected
significant, indicating some reliable age-related variation in
—
reading recognition that was not captured by either processing
time or naming time.
In the second set of analyses, we used structural-equation
modeling to provide an estimate of the overall fit of the data to
the conceptual model depicted in Figure 1. All structural mod-
eling was performed with the EzPATH module (Steiger, 1989)
in which least-squares estimates of path coefficients were pro-
duced and used as starting values in maximum likelihood esti-
mation. Of particular interest were comparisons between
nested models in which some of the path coefficients of Figure
1 were set to zero. Two of these reduced models were compared
with Model 1, which included all paths. Model 2 included five
paths (Paths 1, 2, 3, 8, and 10) and corresponded to the hypoth-
eses that (a) processing speed had no influence on naming time
or reading and (b) age was linked to reading recognition and
to naming time, which was also linked to reading recognition.
Model 3 also includedfivepaths, those that had significant co-
efficients in the multiple regression analyses (Paths 1, 3, 5, 8,
and 10). According to this model, age-related increases in pro-
cessing speed were linked to reading recognition, which was
linked to comprehension; in addition, age was linked to reading
recognition.
Several measures were used to evaluate these models. The
most familiar, the chi-square statistic, can be used to determine
if the data deviate from the model in a statistically significant
manner. It can also be used to determined if the nested models
differ in their fit. However, chi-square analysis has a number of
limitations as an overall descriptive measure of thefitof the data
to the model. For example, it is sensitive to sample size, which
means that, with large samples, conceptually minor deviations
from the model can cause the model to be rejected (Loehlin,
1992). Consequently, several other measures were also calcu-
lated to evaluate the models. The adjusted population gamma
index and the Joreskog-Sorbom goodness-of-fit index both
range from 0 to 1, with the latter indicating perfect correspon-
dence between model and data; values greater than .90 indicate
a good fit. The adjusted root-mean-square is a measure of the
size of the residuals, adjusted for the complexity of the model;
Table 3
Summary ofMultiple Regression Analyses
Dependent
Independent variable variable
Age, speed, naming, recognition Comprehension .72
.62
Age, speed, naming Recognition
Age, speed Naming .62
Age Speed .49
Note. All R2s are significant at p < .01.
 PROCESSING SPEED AND READING
Table 4
Coefficients for Paths in Figure 1
Path Coefficient
1. Age - • speed -.70*
2. Age -» naming time -.02
3. Age -» recognition .46*
4. Age -*• comprehension .09
5. Speed - • naming time .77*
6. Speed-• recognition -.10
7. Speed - • comprehension .04
8. Naming -»• recognition -.33*
9. Naming -»• comprehension -.07
10. Recognition-• comprehension .77*
*p<.01.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
values less than .10 indicate a good fit of the data to the model
(Steiger, 1989).
These measures are shown in Table 5 for all three models. All
of the models resulted in significant chi-squares, meaning that
none was entirely consistent with the data. More informative
are the comparisons of Model 1, which included all 10 paths,
with Models 2 and 3, which included 5 paths each. Models 1
and 3 did not differ in their fit to the data, x2(5, N = 144) =
3.87, p > .10, indicating that Paths 2, 4, 6, 7, and 9 could be
eliminated from the model without a significant change in the
adequacy with which the data were characterized. In contrast,
the comparison of Models 1 and 2 resulted in a substantial loss
in the fit of the model to the data, x2(5, N = 144) = 81.66, p <
.01. In other words, the full model provided no better charac-
terization of the data than did a reduced model that included
links between age, speed, naming, reading recognition, and
reading comprehension, as well as a link between age and read-
ing recognition. However, the data were inconsistent with a re-
duced model of comparable complexity (i.e., 5 paths) in which
processing speed had no direct impact on naming or reading.
Consistent with these results, Model 3 yielded the highest
value for the adjusted population gamma index and the lowest
value for the adjusted root-mean-square index, and it differed
only slightly from Model 1 on the Joreskog-Sorbom goodness-
of-fit index. The absolute values of these measures were not
quite in the range associated with "good" fits but this is not
surprising: Figure 1 is not intended to be a complete model of
reading and age-related change therein and, consequently,
should not be totally consistent with the data.
Discussion
The present findings can be summarized as follows: Age-re-
lated change in speed of processing was linked to more rapid
naming, which was linked to reading recognition, which was
linked to reading comprehension. These results are not consis-
tent with the traditional interpretation that automaticity is the
basis for the link between reading skill and rapid naming of
digits, letters, and colors. If this interpretation were correct,
naming times should have been linked to age because automa-
ticity is a function of age-related experience. Instead, the results
are consistent with the view that times to name these stimuli are
953
determined by a global mechanism that limits the speed with
which most cognitive processes are executed. The naming tasks
apparently predict decoding of individual words because they
measure the speed with which codes for familiar stimuli can be
accessed. Rapid access benefits decoding because it means that
children have more time to integrate individual codes (e.g., for
letters or clusters of letters) before this information is lost from
working memory.
At the same time, the results indicate that the causal frame-
work depicted in Figure 1 is incomplete. Age was also associated
with reading recognition, indicating that other age-related vari-
ables need to be incorporated into the causal model. One possi-
ble mediating variable would the capacity of working memory.
There is substantial age-related change in working memory
(Kail, 1992), and greater memory capacity is associated with
greater reading recognition skill (e.g., Stevenson & Newman,
1986). Thus, the age and reading recognition link may be medi-
ated by age-related increases in working memory capacity.
In addition to shedding light on the nature of the relation
between naming and reading, the present results provide further
evidence concerning the influence of age-related change in
speed of processing. Decoding is usually not considered to be a
speeded task, and the Reading Recognition measure was explic-
itly untimed. Nevertheless, decoding performance was pre-
dicted by processing speed. In the case of reading, as was the
case with memory, relatively poor performance by young chil-
dren may reflect the fact that their speed of processing was too
slow to allow completion of the processes necessary for success-
ful performance.
More generally, the presentfindingscontribute to further un-
derstanding of processing speed as a vehicle of developmental
change. Traditionally, a shortcoming of global developmental
mechanisms was that they could not be linked readily to pro-
cesses responsible for performance in particular domains. A fre-
quent criticism of Jean Piaget's theory, for example, was that
the developmental mechanisms were too vague to be used to
generate exact predictions concerning performance on specific
tasks, and, consequently, the mechanisms were untestable (Kail
& Bisanz, 1982). Hence, an essential ingredient for such global
developmental mechanisms is that they delineate precisely the
connections between domain-specific processes and the global
mechanism. In the present case, naming times provide the me-
diating link between processing speed, on the one hand, and
decoding and comprehension, on the other: Increased process-
Table 5
Measures ofthe Fit of Three Models
Measure Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Chi-square 162.50* 244.16* 166.37*
APGI .82 .74 .86
GFI .84 .75 .83
ARMS .14 .17 .12
Note. Model 1 includes all 10 paths of Figure 1; Model 2 includes
Paths 1, 2, 3, 8, and 10; and Model 3 includes Paths 1, 3, 5, 8, and 10.
APGI = adjusted population gamma index; GFI = Joreskog-Sorbom
goodness-of-fit index; ARMS = adjusted root-mean-square index.
*p<.0\.
 954 ROBERT KAIL AND LYNDA K. HALL
ing speed with age means that names can be accessed more rap-
idly. In the memory studies, rate of articulation was the mediat-
ing link between processing speed and recall. Additional studies
of this sort, in which the impact of processing speed is examined
in other domains, should help to illuminate links between
global and domain-specific developmental change.
References
Cattell, R. B. (1963). Theory for fluid and crystallized intelligence: A
critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 1-22.
Hale, S., Fry, A. E, & Jessie, K. A. (1993). Effects of practice on speed
of information processing in children and adults: Age sensitivity and
age invariance. Developmental Psychology, 29, 880-892.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Hitch, G. J., Halliday, M. S., & Littler, J. E. (1989). Item identification
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
time and rehearsal rate as predictors of memory span in children.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 321-337.
Horn, J. L. (1985). Remodeling old models of intelligence. In B. B. Wol-
man (Ed.), Handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 847-870).
New York: Prentice Hall.
Kail, R. (1991a). Developmental change in speed of processing during
childhood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 490-501.
Kail, R. (1991b). Processing time declines exponentially during child-
hood and adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 27, 259-266.
Kail, R. (1992). Processing speed, speech rate, and memory. Develop-
mental Psychology, 28, 899-904.
Kail, R., & Bisanz, J. (1982). Information processing and cognitive de-
velopment. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 17, 45-81.
Kail, R., & Park, Y. (1994). Processing time, articulation time, and
memory span. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 57, 2 8 1 -
291.
Loehlin, J. C. (1992). Latent variable models (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Spring, C , & Davis, J. M. (1988). Relations of digit naming speed with
three components of reading. Applied' Psycholinguistics, 9, 315-334.
Steiger, J. H. (1989). Ez Path: Causal modeling. Evanston, IL: Systat.
Stevenson, H. W., & Newman, R. S. (1986). Long-term prediction of
achievement and attitudes in mathematics and reading. Child Devel-
opment, 57, 646-659.
Wolf, M., Bally, H., & Morris, R. (1986). Automaticity, retrieval pro-
cesses, and reading: A longitudinal study in average and impaired
readers. Child Development, 57, 988-1000.
Received November 30, 1994
Revision received February 28, 1994
Accepted February 28, 1994 •