Who Are the Noisiest Neighbors in the Hood? Using Error Analyses to Study the Acquisition of Letter-Position Processing

This research examines the acquisition of letter-position processing. Study 1 investigated letter-position processing in Grades 1-6 and adult readers, using the occurrence of specific error types as the outcome measure. Between Grades 1 and 2, there was a shift from making more other-word to making...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition memory, and cognition, 2018-09, Vol.44 (9), p.1384-1396
Hauptverfasser: Marinus, Eva, Kezilas, Yvette, Kohnen, Saskia, Robidoux, Serje, Castles, Anne
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1396
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1384
container_title Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition
container_volume 44
creator Marinus, Eva
Kezilas, Yvette
Kohnen, Saskia
Robidoux, Serje
Castles, Anne
description This research examines the acquisition of letter-position processing. Study 1 investigated letter-position processing in Grades 1-6 and adult readers, using the occurrence of specific error types as the outcome measure. Between Grades 1 and 2, there was a shift from making more other-word to making more letter-position errors. This shift was a function of reading proficiency, not of years of reading instruction. Based on the multiple-route model of reading development (Grainger, Lété, Bertand, Dufau, & Ziegler, 2012), we argue that the fact that children make fewer other-word errors (i.e., mostly letter-identity errors) opens up the opportunity for them to make "the more advanced" letter-position errors. Finally, skilled adult readers still made fewer letter-position errors than typical readers in Grade 6, suggesting that the acquisition process is not finalized by the end of primary school. In Study 2, we directly compared letter-position processing with letter-identity processing. Thirty children in Grade 3 and 30 children in Grade 4 read aloud words with and without higher-frequency distractors. Children more often misread a word with a higher-frequency distractor than without such a distractor and this effect was stronger for below-average than for above-average readers. Converging with the results of Study 1, we found that a letter-position distractor is more disruptive than a letter-identity distractor. These results confirm that the acquisition of letter-position processing lags behind of that of letter-identity processing. The results are discussed within the framework of the Lexical Tuning Hypothesis (Castles, Davis, Cavalot, & Forster, 2007), which stresses the importance of feedback between letter (identity and position) coding and (developing) orthographic representations.
doi_str_mv 10.1037/xlm0000524
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2022135824</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1191921</ericid><sourcerecordid>2108741681</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a402t-7dfe3af56dcb620a69aee6c290597acbb0abdd9a769cafa5da4dd5d8449b69b53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc2LFDEQxYMo7rh68a4EvIjYms_uzkmGZXSVYV3QxWNIJ9U7WXo6s0kanf_e9M64ggfrkiLvx6sqHkLPKXlHCW_e_xq2pJRk4gFaUMVVRVkrH6IFYU1bNVzxE_QkpZsZIrx9jE6Yqlnp-AL9_LEJeBkB5w3gi-CTh5TxBfjrTRdiwn68U85DcB_wVfLjNV7FGCJejmbYJ0g4B_wtT25_xy3t7VQ8sg8jDj1eQ84Qq8tw_LqMwUKaXZ6iR70ZEjw7vqfo6uPq-9l5tf766fPZcl0ZQViuGtcDN72sne3KyqZWBqC2TBGpGmO7jpjOOWWaWlnTG-mMcE66VgjV1aqT_BS9PvjuYridym1665OFYTAjhClpRhijXLZMFPTVP-hNmGI5s1CUtI2gdUv_SxFGm1YqMXu9OVA2hpQi9HoX_dbEvaZEz6Hpv6EV-OXRcuq24O7RPykV4MUBgOjtvbz6Qqmiis07vT3oZmf0Lu2tidnbAZKdYoQxz8O0EFppylvBfwNMGqub</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2021785944</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Who Are the Noisiest Neighbors in the Hood? Using Error Analyses to Study the Acquisition of Letter-Position Processing</title><source>APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Marinus, Eva ; Kezilas, Yvette ; Kohnen, Saskia ; Robidoux, Serje ; Castles, Anne</creator><contributor>Greene, Robert L ; Benjamin, Aaron S</contributor><creatorcontrib>Marinus, Eva ; Kezilas, Yvette ; Kohnen, Saskia ; Robidoux, Serje ; Castles, Anne ; Greene, Robert L ; Benjamin, Aaron S</creatorcontrib><description>This research examines the acquisition of letter-position processing. Study 1 investigated letter-position processing in Grades 1-6 and adult readers, using the occurrence of specific error types as the outcome measure. Between Grades 1 and 2, there was a shift from making more other-word to making more letter-position errors. This shift was a function of reading proficiency, not of years of reading instruction. Based on the multiple-route model of reading development (Grainger, Lété, Bertand, Dufau, &amp; Ziegler, 2012), we argue that the fact that children make fewer other-word errors (i.e., mostly letter-identity errors) opens up the opportunity for them to make "the more advanced" letter-position errors. Finally, skilled adult readers still made fewer letter-position errors than typical readers in Grade 6, suggesting that the acquisition process is not finalized by the end of primary school. In Study 2, we directly compared letter-position processing with letter-identity processing. Thirty children in Grade 3 and 30 children in Grade 4 read aloud words with and without higher-frequency distractors. Children more often misread a word with a higher-frequency distractor than without such a distractor and this effect was stronger for below-average than for above-average readers. Converging with the results of Study 1, we found that a letter-position distractor is more disruptive than a letter-identity distractor. These results confirm that the acquisition of letter-position processing lags behind of that of letter-identity processing. The results are discussed within the framework of the Lexical Tuning Hypothesis (Castles, Davis, Cavalot, &amp; Forster, 2007), which stresses the importance of feedback between letter (identity and position) coding and (developing) orthographic representations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0278-7393</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1285</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000524</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29620383</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Alphabets ; Children &amp; youth ; Comparative Analysis ; Elementary School Students ; Error Analysis ; Error Patterns ; Feedback (Response) ; Female ; Foreign Countries ; Grade 1 ; Grade 2 ; Human ; Intelligence Tests ; Letters (Alphabet) ; Linguistic Theory ; Male ; Oral Reading ; Reading Ability ; Reading comprehension ; Reading Development ; Reading Instruction ; Reading Processes ; Reading Skills ; Standardized Tests ; Undergraduate Students ; Words (Phonetic Units)</subject><ispartof>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2018-09, Vol.44 (9), p.1384-1396</ispartof><rights>2018 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>(c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).</rights><rights>2018, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Sep 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a402t-7dfe3af56dcb620a69aee6c290597acbb0abdd9a769cafa5da4dd5d8449b69b53</citedby><orcidid>0000-0001-8228-8260 ; 0000-0002-4581-3297 ; 0000-0002-7802-071X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1191921$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29620383$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Greene, Robert L</contributor><contributor>Benjamin, Aaron S</contributor><creatorcontrib>Marinus, Eva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kezilas, Yvette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kohnen, Saskia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robidoux, Serje</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castles, Anne</creatorcontrib><title>Who Are the Noisiest Neighbors in the Hood? Using Error Analyses to Study the Acquisition of Letter-Position Processing</title><title>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</title><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn</addtitle><description>This research examines the acquisition of letter-position processing. Study 1 investigated letter-position processing in Grades 1-6 and adult readers, using the occurrence of specific error types as the outcome measure. Between Grades 1 and 2, there was a shift from making more other-word to making more letter-position errors. This shift was a function of reading proficiency, not of years of reading instruction. Based on the multiple-route model of reading development (Grainger, Lété, Bertand, Dufau, &amp; Ziegler, 2012), we argue that the fact that children make fewer other-word errors (i.e., mostly letter-identity errors) opens up the opportunity for them to make "the more advanced" letter-position errors. Finally, skilled adult readers still made fewer letter-position errors than typical readers in Grade 6, suggesting that the acquisition process is not finalized by the end of primary school. In Study 2, we directly compared letter-position processing with letter-identity processing. Thirty children in Grade 3 and 30 children in Grade 4 read aloud words with and without higher-frequency distractors. Children more often misread a word with a higher-frequency distractor than without such a distractor and this effect was stronger for below-average than for above-average readers. Converging with the results of Study 1, we found that a letter-position distractor is more disruptive than a letter-identity distractor. These results confirm that the acquisition of letter-position processing lags behind of that of letter-identity processing. The results are discussed within the framework of the Lexical Tuning Hypothesis (Castles, Davis, Cavalot, &amp; Forster, 2007), which stresses the importance of feedback between letter (identity and position) coding and (developing) orthographic representations.</description><subject>Alphabets</subject><subject>Children &amp; youth</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Elementary School Students</subject><subject>Error Analysis</subject><subject>Error Patterns</subject><subject>Feedback (Response)</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Grade 1</subject><subject>Grade 2</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Intelligence Tests</subject><subject>Letters (Alphabet)</subject><subject>Linguistic Theory</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Oral Reading</subject><subject>Reading Ability</subject><subject>Reading comprehension</subject><subject>Reading Development</subject><subject>Reading Instruction</subject><subject>Reading Processes</subject><subject>Reading Skills</subject><subject>Standardized Tests</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><subject>Words (Phonetic Units)</subject><issn>0278-7393</issn><issn>1939-1285</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc2LFDEQxYMo7rh68a4EvIjYms_uzkmGZXSVYV3QxWNIJ9U7WXo6s0kanf_e9M64ggfrkiLvx6sqHkLPKXlHCW_e_xq2pJRk4gFaUMVVRVkrH6IFYU1bNVzxE_QkpZsZIrx9jE6Yqlnp-AL9_LEJeBkB5w3gi-CTh5TxBfjrTRdiwn68U85DcB_wVfLjNV7FGCJejmbYJ0g4B_wtT25_xy3t7VQ8sg8jDj1eQ84Qq8tw_LqMwUKaXZ6iR70ZEjw7vqfo6uPq-9l5tf766fPZcl0ZQViuGtcDN72sne3KyqZWBqC2TBGpGmO7jpjOOWWaWlnTG-mMcE66VgjV1aqT_BS9PvjuYridym1665OFYTAjhClpRhijXLZMFPTVP-hNmGI5s1CUtI2gdUv_SxFGm1YqMXu9OVA2hpQi9HoX_dbEvaZEz6Hpv6EV-OXRcuq24O7RPykV4MUBgOjtvbz6Qqmiis07vT3oZmf0Lu2tidnbAZKdYoQxz8O0EFppylvBfwNMGqub</recordid><startdate>201809</startdate><enddate>201809</enddate><creator>Marinus, Eva</creator><creator>Kezilas, Yvette</creator><creator>Kohnen, Saskia</creator><creator>Robidoux, Serje</creator><creator>Castles, Anne</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8228-8260</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4581-3297</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7802-071X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201809</creationdate><title>Who Are the Noisiest Neighbors in the Hood? Using Error Analyses to Study the Acquisition of Letter-Position Processing</title><author>Marinus, Eva ; Kezilas, Yvette ; Kohnen, Saskia ; Robidoux, Serje ; Castles, Anne</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a402t-7dfe3af56dcb620a69aee6c290597acbb0abdd9a769cafa5da4dd5d8449b69b53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Alphabets</topic><topic>Children &amp; youth</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Elementary School Students</topic><topic>Error Analysis</topic><topic>Error Patterns</topic><topic>Feedback (Response)</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Grade 1</topic><topic>Grade 2</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Intelligence Tests</topic><topic>Letters (Alphabet)</topic><topic>Linguistic Theory</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Oral Reading</topic><topic>Reading Ability</topic><topic>Reading comprehension</topic><topic>Reading Development</topic><topic>Reading Instruction</topic><topic>Reading Processes</topic><topic>Reading Skills</topic><topic>Standardized Tests</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><topic>Words (Phonetic Units)</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Marinus, Eva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kezilas, Yvette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kohnen, Saskia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robidoux, Serje</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castles, Anne</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Access via APA PsycArticles® (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Marinus, Eva</au><au>Kezilas, Yvette</au><au>Kohnen, Saskia</au><au>Robidoux, Serje</au><au>Castles, Anne</au><au>Greene, Robert L</au><au>Benjamin, Aaron S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1191921</ericid><atitle>Who Are the Noisiest Neighbors in the Hood? Using Error Analyses to Study the Acquisition of Letter-Position Processing</atitle><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn</addtitle><date>2018-09</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1384</spage><epage>1396</epage><pages>1384-1396</pages><issn>0278-7393</issn><eissn>1939-1285</eissn><abstract>This research examines the acquisition of letter-position processing. Study 1 investigated letter-position processing in Grades 1-6 and adult readers, using the occurrence of specific error types as the outcome measure. Between Grades 1 and 2, there was a shift from making more other-word to making more letter-position errors. This shift was a function of reading proficiency, not of years of reading instruction. Based on the multiple-route model of reading development (Grainger, Lété, Bertand, Dufau, &amp; Ziegler, 2012), we argue that the fact that children make fewer other-word errors (i.e., mostly letter-identity errors) opens up the opportunity for them to make "the more advanced" letter-position errors. Finally, skilled adult readers still made fewer letter-position errors than typical readers in Grade 6, suggesting that the acquisition process is not finalized by the end of primary school. In Study 2, we directly compared letter-position processing with letter-identity processing. Thirty children in Grade 3 and 30 children in Grade 4 read aloud words with and without higher-frequency distractors. Children more often misread a word with a higher-frequency distractor than without such a distractor and this effect was stronger for below-average than for above-average readers. Converging with the results of Study 1, we found that a letter-position distractor is more disruptive than a letter-identity distractor. These results confirm that the acquisition of letter-position processing lags behind of that of letter-identity processing. The results are discussed within the framework of the Lexical Tuning Hypothesis (Castles, Davis, Cavalot, &amp; Forster, 2007), which stresses the importance of feedback between letter (identity and position) coding and (developing) orthographic representations.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>29620383</pmid><doi>10.1037/xlm0000524</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8228-8260</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4581-3297</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7802-071X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0278-7393
ispartof Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2018-09, Vol.44 (9), p.1384-1396
issn 0278-7393
1939-1285
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2022135824
source APA PsycARTICLES
subjects Alphabets
Children & youth
Comparative Analysis
Elementary School Students
Error Analysis
Error Patterns
Feedback (Response)
Female
Foreign Countries
Grade 1
Grade 2
Human
Intelligence Tests
Letters (Alphabet)
Linguistic Theory
Male
Oral Reading
Reading Ability
Reading comprehension
Reading Development
Reading Instruction
Reading Processes
Reading Skills
Standardized Tests
Undergraduate Students
Words (Phonetic Units)
title Who Are the Noisiest Neighbors in the Hood? Using Error Analyses to Study the Acquisition of Letter-Position Processing
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T00%3A51%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Who%20Are%20the%20Noisiest%20Neighbors%20in%20the%20Hood?%20Using%20Error%20Analyses%20to%20Study%20the%20Acquisition%20of%20Letter-Position%20Processing&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20experimental%20psychology.%20Learning,%20memory,%20and%20cognition&rft.au=Marinus,%20Eva&rft.date=2018-09&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1384&rft.epage=1396&rft.pages=1384-1396&rft.issn=0278-7393&rft.eissn=1939-1285&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/xlm0000524&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2108741681%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2021785944&rft_id=info:pmid/29620383&rft_ericid=EJ1191921&rfr_iscdi=true