Spelling and grammar checkers: are they intrusive?
Spelling and grammar checkers help to make surface errors more apparent; do they influence the way in which people revise the content of their writing? We investigated whether the presence of checkers distracts students from making content revisions. Twenty‐five freshmen, 20 English majors and 20 gr...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of educational technology 2006-09, Vol.37 (5), p.721-732 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 732 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 721 |
| container_title | British journal of educational technology |
| container_volume | 37 |
| creator | Figueredo, Lauren Varnhagen, Connie K. |
| description | Spelling and grammar checkers help to make surface errors more apparent; do they influence the way in which people revise the content of their writing? We investigated whether the presence of checkers distracts students from making content revisions. Twenty‐five freshmen, 20 English majors and 20 graduate students revised two essays on a computer, one with the spelling and grammar checkers, and the other with a dictionary. These essays were unfamiliar to the students and rigged with content and surface errors. The checkers helped the participants to revise text for surface features but did not affect the students’ other revisions. Our findings suggest that checkers are helpful yet do not inhibit students’ ability to make content revisions. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00562.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85638140</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ739507</ericid><sourcerecordid>85638140</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5412-6b7a9a24f1a5ebfd4459607f91003f7f702b984a86ca868c04a73f5d9e9bc50d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkF-LEzEUxYO4YF39Bj4Mgr7NePM_EUTWpXYtuypY8TGkabKb7nRak1bbb2_GWbrgixsISTi_c-_NQajC0OCy3iwbzISsFae8IQCiAeCCNPtHaHQUHqMRAMgaA6ZP0NOcl-UJlLMRIt82vm1jd13ZblFdJ7ta2VS5G-9ufcpvK5t8tb3xhyp227TL8Zd__wydBNtm__zuPEXfP45n5xf15ZfJp_Ozy9pxhkkt5tJqS1jAlvt5WDDGtQAZNC6tgwwSyFwrZpVwZSsHzEoa-EJ7PXccFvQUvR7qbtL6587nrVnF7Mq0tvPrXTaKC6owg_-ClHEKSooCvvwHXK53qSufMIRoqcoYPaQGyKV1zskHs0mxhHIwGEwfuVmaPlnTJ2v6yM3fyM2-WF_d1bfZ2TYk27mY7_1SEyCCFu7FwPkU3VEeTyXVHGSR3w3y79j6w4Pbmw_T8azcir8e_DFv_f7ot-nWCEklNz8-T4z6OpWTqwttZvQPre6qNA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>229788686</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Spelling and grammar checkers: are they intrusive?</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Education Source</source><creator>Figueredo, Lauren ; Varnhagen, Connie K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Figueredo, Lauren ; Varnhagen, Connie K.</creatorcontrib><description>Spelling and grammar checkers help to make surface errors more apparent; do they influence the way in which people revise the content of their writing? We investigated whether the presence of checkers distracts students from making content revisions. Twenty‐five freshmen, 20 English majors and 20 graduate students revised two essays on a computer, one with the spelling and grammar checkers, and the other with a dictionary. These essays were unfamiliar to the students and rigged with content and surface errors. The checkers helped the participants to revise text for surface features but did not affect the students’ other revisions. Our findings suggest that checkers are helpful yet do not inhibit students’ ability to make content revisions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1013</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-8535</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00562.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BJETAH</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Automatic teaching ; College students ; Computer Software ; Educational sciences ; Error Correction ; Graduate Students ; Grammar ; Revision (Written Composition) ; Software utilities ; Spelling ; Teaching aids ; Undergraduate Students ; Word processing</subject><ispartof>British journal of educational technology, 2006-09, Vol.37 (5), p.721-732</ispartof><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>2006 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2006 British Education Communications and Technology Agency</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5412-6b7a9a24f1a5ebfd4459607f91003f7f702b984a86ca868c04a73f5d9e9bc50d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5412-6b7a9a24f1a5ebfd4459607f91003f7f702b984a86ca868c04a73f5d9e9bc50d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1467-8535.2006.00562.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1467-8535.2006.00562.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ739507$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=17920263$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Figueredo, Lauren</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varnhagen, Connie K.</creatorcontrib><title>Spelling and grammar checkers: are they intrusive?</title><title>British journal of educational technology</title><description>Spelling and grammar checkers help to make surface errors more apparent; do they influence the way in which people revise the content of their writing? We investigated whether the presence of checkers distracts students from making content revisions. Twenty‐five freshmen, 20 English majors and 20 graduate students revised two essays on a computer, one with the spelling and grammar checkers, and the other with a dictionary. These essays were unfamiliar to the students and rigged with content and surface errors. The checkers helped the participants to revise text for surface features but did not affect the students’ other revisions. Our findings suggest that checkers are helpful yet do not inhibit students’ ability to make content revisions.</description><subject>Automatic teaching</subject><subject>College students</subject><subject>Computer Software</subject><subject>Educational sciences</subject><subject>Error Correction</subject><subject>Graduate Students</subject><subject>Grammar</subject><subject>Revision (Written Composition)</subject><subject>Software utilities</subject><subject>Spelling</subject><subject>Teaching aids</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><subject>Word processing</subject><issn>0007-1013</issn><issn>1467-8535</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkF-LEzEUxYO4YF39Bj4Mgr7NePM_EUTWpXYtuypY8TGkabKb7nRak1bbb2_GWbrgixsISTi_c-_NQajC0OCy3iwbzISsFae8IQCiAeCCNPtHaHQUHqMRAMgaA6ZP0NOcl-UJlLMRIt82vm1jd13ZblFdJ7ta2VS5G-9ufcpvK5t8tb3xhyp227TL8Zd__wydBNtm__zuPEXfP45n5xf15ZfJp_Ozy9pxhkkt5tJqS1jAlvt5WDDGtQAZNC6tgwwSyFwrZpVwZSsHzEoa-EJ7PXccFvQUvR7qbtL6587nrVnF7Mq0tvPrXTaKC6owg_-ClHEKSooCvvwHXK53qSufMIRoqcoYPaQGyKV1zskHs0mxhHIwGEwfuVmaPlnTJ2v6yM3fyM2-WF_d1bfZ2TYk27mY7_1SEyCCFu7FwPkU3VEeTyXVHGSR3w3y79j6w4Pbmw_T8azcir8e_DFv_f7ot-nWCEklNz8-T4z6OpWTqwttZvQPre6qNA</recordid><startdate>200609</startdate><enddate>200609</enddate><creator>Figueredo, Lauren</creator><creator>Varnhagen, Connie K.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing</general><general>Blackwell</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><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>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200609</creationdate><title>Spelling and grammar checkers: are they intrusive?</title><author>Figueredo, Lauren ; Varnhagen, Connie K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5412-6b7a9a24f1a5ebfd4459607f91003f7f702b984a86ca868c04a73f5d9e9bc50d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Automatic teaching</topic><topic>College students</topic><topic>Computer Software</topic><topic>Educational sciences</topic><topic>Error Correction</topic><topic>Graduate Students</topic><topic>Grammar</topic><topic>Revision (Written Composition)</topic><topic>Software utilities</topic><topic>Spelling</topic><topic>Teaching aids</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><topic>Word processing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Figueredo, Lauren</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varnhagen, Connie K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><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>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>British journal of educational technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Figueredo, Lauren</au><au>Varnhagen, Connie K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ739507</ericid><atitle>Spelling and grammar checkers: are they intrusive?</atitle><jtitle>British journal of educational technology</jtitle><date>2006-09</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>721</spage><epage>732</epage><pages>721-732</pages><issn>0007-1013</issn><eissn>1467-8535</eissn><coden>BJETAH</coden><abstract>Spelling and grammar checkers help to make surface errors more apparent; do they influence the way in which people revise the content of their writing? We investigated whether the presence of checkers distracts students from making content revisions. Twenty‐five freshmen, 20 English majors and 20 graduate students revised two essays on a computer, one with the spelling and grammar checkers, and the other with a dictionary. These essays were unfamiliar to the students and rigged with content and surface errors. The checkers helped the participants to revise text for surface features but did not affect the students’ other revisions. Our findings suggest that checkers are helpful yet do not inhibit students’ ability to make content revisions.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00562.x</doi><tpages>12</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0007-1013 |
| ispartof | British journal of educational technology, 2006-09, Vol.37 (5), p.721-732 |
| issn | 0007-1013 1467-8535 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85638140 |
| source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Education Source |
| subjects | Automatic teaching College students Computer Software Educational sciences Error Correction Graduate Students Grammar Revision (Written Composition) Software utilities Spelling Teaching aids Undergraduate Students Word processing |
| title | Spelling and grammar checkers: are they intrusive? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T08%3A57%3A19IST&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=Spelling%20and%20grammar%20checkers:%20are%20they%20intrusive?&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20educational%20technology&rft.au=Figueredo,%20Lauren&rft.date=2006-09&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=721&rft.epage=732&rft.pages=721-732&rft.issn=0007-1013&rft.eissn=1467-8535&rft.coden=BJETAH&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00562.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E85638140%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=229788686&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ739507&rfr_iscdi=true |