Methods for identifying dyslexia in adults vary widely between studies. Researchers have to decide how many tests to use, which tests are considered to be the most reliable, and how to determine cut-off scores. The aim of this study was to develop an objective and powerful method for diagnosing dyslexia. We took various methodological measures, most of which are new compared to previous methods. We used a large sample of Dutch first-year psychology students, we considered several options for exclusion and inclusion criteria, we collected as many cognitive tests as possible, we used six independent sources of biographical information for a criterion of dyslexia, we compared the predictive power of discriminant analyses and logistic regression analyses, we used both sum scores and item scores as predictor variables, we used self-report questions as predictor variables, and we retested the reliability of predictions with repeated prediction analyses using an adjusted criterion. We were able to identify 74 dyslexic and 369 non-dyslexic students. For 37 students, various predictions were too inconsistent for a final classification. The most reliable predictions were acquired with item scores and self-report questions. The main conclusion is that it is possible to identify dyslexia with a high reliability, although the exact nature of dyslexia is still unknown. We therefore believe that this study yielded valuable information for future methods of identifying dyslexia in Dutch as well as in other languages, and that this would be beneficial for comparing studies across countries.