Do reading and spelling share a lexicon?

Cogn Psychol

Department of Psychological Sciences, Kent State University, United States.

Published: May 2016

In the reading and spelling literature, an ongoing debate concerns whether reading and spelling share a single orthographic lexicon or rely upon independent lexica. Available evidence tends to support a single lexicon account over an independent lexica account, but evidence is mixed and open to alternative explanation. In the current work, we propose another, largely ignored account--separate-but-shared lexica--according to which reading and spelling have separate orthographic lexica, but information can be shared between them. We report three experiments designed to competitively evaluate these three theoretical accounts. In each experiment, participants learned new words via reading training and/or spelling training. The key manipulation concerned the amount of reading versus spelling practice a given item received. Following training, we assessed both response time and accuracy on final outcome measures of reading and spelling. According to the independent lexica account, final performance in one modality will not be influenced by the level of practice in the other modality. According to the single lexicon account, final performance will depend on the overall amount of practice regardless of modality. According to the separate-but-shared account, final performance will be influenced by the level of practice in both modalities but will benefit more from same-modality practice. Results support the separate-but-shared account, indicating that reading and spelling rely upon separate lexica, but information can be shared between them.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.02.003DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

reading spelling
24
independent lexica
12
account final
12
final performance
12
reading
8
spelling share
8
single lexicon
8
lexicon account
8
lexica account
8
lexica shared
8

Similar Publications

Article Synopsis
  • Dyslexia is a common learning difficulty that causes significant reading, spelling, and writing challenges, leading to psychological issues in affected children.
  • A study compared the psychological functioning of children with dyslexia (40 boys) to typically developing children (50 boys) aged 7-12, finding the dyslexic group experienced significantly more behavioral problems and higher anxiety levels.
  • The research emphasizes the link between emotional and behavioral issues in dyslexic children, suggesting that interventions should also focus on their emotional needs for better support.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

This study aimed to examine metalinguistic skills and reading processes in children diagnosed with ADHD, compared to a matched control group. An explanatory experimental design was employed, involving a sample of 194 children from Manizales, comprising 97 children diagnosed with ADHD and 97 controls. The study utilized tasks from the Children's Neuropsychological Assessment (CNA) protocol to assess metalinguistic and reading abilities.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Broadly, individuals' cognitive abilities influence their academic skills, but the significance and strength of specific cognitive abilities varies across academic domains and may vary across age. Simultaneous analyses of data from many tests and cross-battery analyses can address inconsistent findings from prior studies by creating comprehensively defined constructs, which allow for greater generalizability of findings. The purpose of this study was to examine the cross-battery direct effects and developmental differences in youths' cognitive abilities on their basic reading abilities, as well as the relations between their reading and writing achievement.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Beginning reading instruction: Syllables or phonemes? An experimental training study with Arabic-speaking preliterate preschoolers.

Dev Psychol

November 2024

Department of Learning Disabilities, Faculty of Education, Edmond J. Safra Brain Research Center for the Study of Learning Disabilities, University of Haifa.

This study addressed four research questions: (1) Does teaching using syllables or using phonemes lead to better progress in beginning reading and spelling? (2) Does the effectiveness of syllabic or phonemic instruction depend on children's preferences for these units as predicted by Ziegler and Goswami's (2005) "availability" hypothesis? (3) Do children taught via syllabic consonant-vowel (CV) units spontaneously develop insight into the phonemic basis of an alphabetic writing system, and (4) Do individual differences in reading and spelling gains in phoneme-based instruction depend more on working memory, short-term memory, and Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) owing to the greater number of units that must be rapidly retrieved and processed? To test these hypotheses, 104 preliterate preschool children were taught to read and spell using an unfamiliar script. Across 14 training sessions, children were taught using either whole CV units, phoneme units, or demiphoneme units. Retention and generalization were evaluated during training and 1 week later.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Control energy detects discrepancies in good vs. poor readers' structural-functional coupling during a rhyming task.

Neuroimage

December 2024

Department of Psychology, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada; Brain and Mind Institute, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada; Haskins Laboratories, New Haven CT, USA.

Neuroimaging studies have identified functional and structural brain circuits that support reading. However, much less is known about how reading-related functional dynamics are constrained by white matter structure. Network control theory proposes that cortical brain dynamics are linearly determined by the white matter connectome, using control energy to evaluate the difficulty of the transition from one cognitive state to another.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!