# Is there a reading comprehension theory that suggests simple reading questions are best solved via simple text analysis, and vice versa?

My main field is not Linguistics/reading comprehension so what I am asking might sound a bit silly or not make a lot of sense. My question could certainly be better-phrased.

Is there a theory in reading comprehension that says something like: "The simple reading questions are best answered via simple text analyses, whereas more difficult reading questions are best answered with more complex text analyses"?

I think this intuitively makes sense, since for example, if a person over-analyzes (over-thinks through) the simple reading questions from Grade 1 classes, such a practice can introduce unnecessary complications in deriving the correct answer for the questions.

PS: I guess by saying "elementary (easy/simple) reading questions" vs. "advanced (difficult) reading questions", I am referring more to their readability/difficulty as depicted in the English classes of different grade levels. For example, the reading questions of the Kindergarten/Grade 1 classes are considered much easier than the advanced'' reading questions that are from college-level English classes.

PPS: I think I need to be more precise on what I mean by simple text analysis'' and complex text analysis''. When school teachers try to teach students on how to analyze texts, they refer to the theory like the "three levels of reading" (literal, inferential, critical). In this context, simple text analysis'' would be the analyses that focus on literal comprehension whereas complex text analysis'' would be the analyses that focus on critical comprehension.

Thank you, :S