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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition memory, and cognition, 2018-09, Vol.44 (9), p.1384-1396 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
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, & 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.</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 & 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, & 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.</description><subject>Alphabets</subject><subject>Children & 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 & 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, & 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.</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 |