Abstract

Most studies of the cognitive consequences of literacy have attempted to compare the performance of literate individuals with that of illiterate individuals. We argue that it is not absolutely necessary to examine illiterates in order to study the cognitive consequences of reading experience because there is enormous variation in exposure to print even within a generally literate society. In the present study, we tested several methods of assessing differential exposure to print and demonstrated that all have significant correlations with measures of vocabulary, cultural knowledge, spelling ability, and verbal fluency. Several indicators of print exposure predicted variance in these knowledge domains even when general ability and reading-comprehension skill were statistically controlled. Our results, although correlational, suggest that print exposure is an independent contributor to the development of certain verbal skills.