How orthographic knowledge is related to efficient word reading? Testing competing hypotheses

IF 2 2区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
{"title":"How orthographic knowledge is related to efficient word reading? Testing competing hypotheses","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10525-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>This study aims to explore the relations of phonological awareness and rapid naming with efficient word reading. Our work builds on the strong evidence base of associations between phonological awareness, rapid naming, orthographic knowledge, and efficient word reading. Specifically, we tested a pathway linking phonological awareness to orthographic knowledge and on to efficient word reading and a pathway linking rapid naming to orthographic knowledge and on to efficient word reading,, following on the self-teaching (Share in Cognition 55(2):151–218, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)00645-2) and rapid naming hypotheses (Wolf &amp; Bowers in J Educ Psychol 91(3):415–438, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415), respectively. Based on these two classic theories of orthographic development, we conducted a multiple-path analysis to test the mediating role of orthographic knowledge in the relation of phonological awareness and rapid naming with efficient word reading. The sample consisted of 231 monolingual Greek-speaking children; 121 (58 males) Grade 2 children (<em>M</em> age = 7.82 years, SD = 3.32) and 110 (51 males) Grade 5 children (<em>M</em> age = 10.84, years, SD = 3.54) participated in the study. After establishing the significant contribution of orthographic knowledge to efficient word reading, we found two direct pathways: one from phonological awareness in Grade 5 and one from rapid naming in Grades 2 and 5 and two indirect pathways in which phonological awareness and rapid naming contribute to efficient word reading via orthographic knowledge in both Grades. Then, we assessed whether there is a shift over one of the two theories over time, using a multi-group analysis with data from Grades 2 and 5. Indeed, we found differences between two Grades in pathways from sub-lexical orthographic knowledge to efficient word reading, from phonological awareness and rapid naming to efficient word reading, and from rapid naming to sub-lexical orthographic knowledge. Our findings revealed that both pathways, representing the main self-teaching and rapid naming hypotheses, are active and work in both Grades, reflecting the parallel support of the two classic theories of orthographic knowledge development.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading and Writing","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10525-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aims to explore the relations of phonological awareness and rapid naming with efficient word reading. Our work builds on the strong evidence base of associations between phonological awareness, rapid naming, orthographic knowledge, and efficient word reading. Specifically, we tested a pathway linking phonological awareness to orthographic knowledge and on to efficient word reading and a pathway linking rapid naming to orthographic knowledge and on to efficient word reading,, following on the self-teaching (Share in Cognition 55(2):151–218, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)00645-2) and rapid naming hypotheses (Wolf & Bowers in J Educ Psychol 91(3):415–438, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415), respectively. Based on these two classic theories of orthographic development, we conducted a multiple-path analysis to test the mediating role of orthographic knowledge in the relation of phonological awareness and rapid naming with efficient word reading. The sample consisted of 231 monolingual Greek-speaking children; 121 (58 males) Grade 2 children (M age = 7.82 years, SD = 3.32) and 110 (51 males) Grade 5 children (M age = 10.84, years, SD = 3.54) participated in the study. After establishing the significant contribution of orthographic knowledge to efficient word reading, we found two direct pathways: one from phonological awareness in Grade 5 and one from rapid naming in Grades 2 and 5 and two indirect pathways in which phonological awareness and rapid naming contribute to efficient word reading via orthographic knowledge in both Grades. Then, we assessed whether there is a shift over one of the two theories over time, using a multi-group analysis with data from Grades 2 and 5. Indeed, we found differences between two Grades in pathways from sub-lexical orthographic knowledge to efficient word reading, from phonological awareness and rapid naming to efficient word reading, and from rapid naming to sub-lexical orthographic knowledge. Our findings revealed that both pathways, representing the main self-teaching and rapid naming hypotheses, are active and work in both Grades, reflecting the parallel support of the two classic theories of orthographic knowledge development.

正字法知识与高效单词阅读有何关系?检验相互竞争的假设
摘要 本研究旨在探讨语音意识和快速命名与高效单词阅读之间的关系。我们的研究建立在语音意识、快速命名、正字法知识和高效单词阅读之间关联的强大证据基础之上。具体来说,我们测试了语音意识与正字法知识和高效单词阅读之间的联系途径,以及快速命名与正字法知识和高效单词阅读之间的联系途径,这两个途径分别沿袭了自学假说(Share in Cognition 55(2):151-218, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)00645-2)和快速命名假说(Wolf & Bowers in J Educ Psychol 91(3):415-438, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415)。基于这两种经典的正字法发展理论,我们进行了多重路径分析,以检验正字法知识在语音意识和快速命名与高效单词阅读之间的中介作用。样本由 231 名单语希腊语儿童组成,其中 121 名(58 名男性)二年级儿童(平均年龄为 7.82 岁,标准差为 3.32)和 110 名(51 名男性)五年级儿童(平均年龄为 10.84 岁,标准差为 3.54)参与了研究。在确定了正字法知识对高效单词阅读的重要贡献后,我们发现了两条直接途径:一条来自五年级的语音意识,一条来自二年级和五年级的快速命名;还有两条间接途径,即语音意识和快速命名通过正字法知识对两个年级的高效单词阅读做出了贡献。然后,我们利用二年级和五年级的数据进行了多组分析,评估了随着时间的推移,这两种理论中的一种是否会发生转变。事实上,我们发现两个年级在从副词汇正字法知识到高效单词阅读、从语音意识和快速命名到高效单词阅读以及从快速命名到副词汇正字法知识的途径上存在差异。我们的研究结果表明,代表主要自学假设和快速命名假设的两种途径在两个年级都很活跃,都能发挥作用,这反映了正字法知识发展的两种经典理论的平行支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
16.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Reading and writing skills are fundamental to literacy. Consequently, the processes involved in reading and writing and the failure to acquire these skills, as well as the loss of once well-developed reading and writing abilities have been the targets of intense research activity involving professionals from a variety of disciplines, such as neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, psycholinguistics and education. The findings that have emanated from this research are most often written up in a lingua that is specific to the particular discipline involved, and are published in specialized journals. This generally leaves the expert in one area almost totally unaware of what may be taking place in any area other than their own. Reading and Writing cuts through this fog of jargon, breaking down the artificial boundaries between disciplines. The journal focuses on the interaction among various fields, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Reading and Writing publishes high-quality, scientific articles pertaining to the processes, acquisition, and loss of reading and writing skills. The journal fully represents the necessarily interdisciplinary nature of research in the field, focusing on the interaction among various disciplines, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Coverage in Reading and Writing includes models of reading, writing and spelling at all age levels; orthography and its relation to reading and writing; computer literacy; cross-cultural studies; and developmental and acquired disorders of reading and writing. It publishes research articles, critical reviews, theoretical papers, and case studies. Reading and Writing is one of the most highly cited journals in Education, Educational Research, and Educational Psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信