Studies of poor comprehenders vary in the selection criteria and tests that they use to define poor comprehension. Could these differences play a role in determining findings about poor comprehension? This study assessed the extent to which differences in selection methods affect who gets identified as poor comprehenders, and examined how their cognitive profiles differ. Over 1,500 children, ages 8-19, took multiple tests of reading comprehension, listening comprehension, single word reading and non-word reading. Poor comprehension was defined by performing in the low-tail and by discrepancies either with word or non-word reading. Odds of any two selection methods identifying the same individuals were generally low, and depended on type of comprehension test more than modality, as well as selection criteria, and comprehender’s age. Poor comprehenders selected by the different methods were found to vary in IQ, working memory, but not attention. The findings show that differences across studies in tests and selection criteria used to define poor comprehension are not insignificant and can have substantial consequences for what is meant by poor comprehension and its associated deficits.