Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-r8qmj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-18T09:10:52.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Orthographic processing and children’s word reading

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2018

S. HÉLÈNE DEACON Open the ORCID record for S. HÉLÈNE DEACON [Opens in a new window] ,
ADRIAN PASQUARELLA ,
EVA MARINUS ,
TALISA TIMS  and
ANNE CASTLES
S. HÉLÈNE DEACON
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University
ADRIAN PASQUARELLA
Affiliation:
University of Delaware
EVA MARINUS
Affiliation:
Macquarie University
TALISA TIMS
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University
ANNE CASTLES
Affiliation:
Macquarie University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Theories of reading development generally agree that, in addition to phonological decoding, some kind of orthographic processing skill underlies the ability to learn to read words. However, there is a lack of clarity as to which aspect(s) of orthographic processing are key in reading development. We test here whether this is orthographic knowledge and/or orthographic learning. Whereas orthographic knowledge has been argued to reflect a child’s existing store of orthographic representations, orthographic learning is concerned with the ability to form these representations. In a longitudinal study of second- and third-grade students, we evaluate the relations between these two aspects of orthographic processing and word-reading outcomes. The results of our analyses show that variance captured by orthographic knowledge overlaps with that of word reading, to the point that they form a single latent word-reading factor. In contrast, orthographic learning is distinctive from this factor. Further, structural equation modeling demonstrates that early orthographic learning was related to gains in word reading skills. We discuss the implications of these findings for theories of word-reading development.

Keywords

orthographic knowledgeorthographic learningword reading

Information

Type
Original Article
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , March 2019 , pp. 509 - 534
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Barker, T. A., Torgesen, J. K., & Wagner, R. K. (1992). The role of orthographic processing skills on five different reading tasks. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 335–345.Google Scholar
Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 815–824.Google Scholar
Bowey, J. A., & Miller, R. (2007). Correlates of orthographic learning in third-grade children’s silent reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 30, 115–128.Google Scholar
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Burt, J. S. (2006). What is orthographic processing skill and how does it relate to word identification in reading? Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 400–417.Google Scholar
Byrne, B., Coventry, W. L., Olson, R. K., Hulslander, J., Wadsworth, S., DeFries, J. C., … Samuelsson, S. (2008). A behaviour-genetic analysis of orthographic learning, spelling and decoding. Journal of Research in Reading, 31, 8–21.Google Scholar
Cassar, M., & Treiman, R. (1997). The beginnings of orthographic knowledge: Children’s knowledge of double letters in words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 631–644.Google Scholar
Castles, A., Coltheart, M., Larsen, L., Jones, P., Saunders, S., & McArthur, G. (2009). Assessing the basic components of reading: Revision of the Castles and Coltheart with new norms. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 14, 67–88.Google Scholar
Castles, A., & Nation, K. (2006). How does orthographic learning happen? In S. Andrews (Ed.), From inkmarks to ideas: Challenges and controversies about word recognition and reading (pp. 151–179). Hove, England: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Chen, F., Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Kirby, J., & Paxton, P. (2008). An Empirical Evaluation of the Use of Fixed Cutoff Points in RMSEA Test Statistic in Structural Equation Models. Sociological Methods & Research, 36, 462–494.Google Scholar
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255.Google Scholar
Conners, F. A., Loveall, S. J., Moore, M. S., Hume, L. E., & Maddox, C. D. (2011). An individual differences analysis of the self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108, 402–410.Google Scholar
Conrad, N. J., & Deacon, S. H. (2016). Children’s orthographic knowledge and their word reading skill: Testing bidirectional relations. Scientific Studies of Reading. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/10888438.2016.1183128 Google Scholar
Conrad, N. J., Harris, N., & Williams, J. (2013). Individual differences in children’s literacy development: The contribution of orthographic knowledge. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 1223–1239.Google Scholar
Cunningham, A. E. (2006). Accounting for children’s orthographic learning while reading text: Do children self-teach? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 95, 56–77.Google Scholar
Cunningham, A. E., Perry, K. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2001). Converging evidence for the concept of orthographic processing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14, 549–568.Google Scholar
Deacon, S. H., Benere, J., & Castles, A. (2012). Chicken or egg? Untangling the relationship between orthographic processing skill and reading accuracy. Cognition, 122, 110–117.Google Scholar
Ehri, L. C. (1995). Phases of development in learning to read words by sight. Journal of Research in Reading, 18, 116–125.Google Scholar
Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 167–188.Google Scholar
Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence for the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 250–287.Google Scholar
Ehri, L. C., & Roberts, K. T. (1979). Do beginners learn printed words better in contexts or in isolation? Child Development, 50, 675–685.Google Scholar
Fan, X., & Sivo, S. A. (2005). Sensitivity of Fit Indexes to Misspecified Structural or Measurement Model Components: Rationale of Two-Index Strategy Revisited. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 12, 343–367.Google Scholar
Georgiou, G. K., Parrila, R., & Papadopoulos, T. C. (2008). Predictors of word decoding and reading fluency across languages varying in orthographic consistency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 566–580.Google Scholar
Hagiliassis, N., Pratt, C., & Johnston, M. (2006). Orthographic and phonological processes in reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 235–263.Google Scholar
Hulslander, J., Olson, R. K., Willcutt, E. G., & Wadsworth, S. J. (2010). Longitudinal stability of reading-related skills and their prediction of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 14, 111–136.Google Scholar
Juel, C., Griffith, P. L., & Gough, P. B. (1986). Acquisition of literacy: A longitudinal study of children in first and second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 243–255.Google Scholar
Katzir, T., Kim, Y., Wolf, M., O’Brien, B., Kennedy, B., Lovett, M., & Morris, R. (2006). Reading fluency: The whole is more than the parts. Annals of Dyslexia, 56, 51–82.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. (1975). Cross-lagged panel correlation: A test for spuriousness. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 887–903.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. (2015). The Performance of RMSEA in Models With Small Degrees of Freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44, 486–507.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Kline, R. B. (1998). Methodology in the social sciences. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Little, T. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Grayson, D. (2005). Goodness of fit in structural equation models. In Maydeu-Olivares, A. & McArdle, J. J. (Eds.), Contemporary psychometrics: A festschrift for Roderick P. McDonald (pp. 275–340). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 11, 320–341.Google Scholar
McArthur, G. M., Ellis, D., Atkinson, C. M., & Coltheart, M. (2008). Auditory processing deficits in children with reading and language impairments: Can they (and should they) be treated? Cognition, 107, 946–977.Google Scholar
McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64–82.Google Scholar
Mimeau, C., Ricketts, J., & Deacon, S. H. (2018). The role of orthographic and semantic learning in word reading and reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22, 384–400, doi: 10.1080/10888438.2018.1464575 Google Scholar
Mol, S. E., & Bus, A. G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 267–296.Google Scholar
Nation, K. (2017). Nurturing a lexical legacy: Reading experience is critical for the development of word reading skill. Npj Science of Learning, 2, 3, doi: 10.1038/s41539-017-0004-7 Google Scholar
Nation, K., Angells, P., & Castles, A. (2007). Orthographic learning via self-teaching in children learning to read English: Effects of exposure, durability, and context. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 96, 71–84.Google Scholar
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.Google Scholar
Olson, R., Forsberg, H., Wise, B., & Rack, J. (1994). Measurement of word recognition, orthographic, and phonological skills. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues (pp. 243–277). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.Google Scholar
Ouellette, G., & Fraser, J. R. (2009). What exactly is a yait anyway: The role of semantics in orthographic learning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104, 239–251.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 357–383.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 189–213). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ricketts, J., Bishop, D. M., Pimperton, H., & Nation, K. (2011). The role of self-teaching in learning orthographic and semantic aspects of new words. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 47–70.Google Scholar
Roman, A. A., Kirby, J. R., Parrila, R. K., Wade-Woolley, L., & Deacon, S. H. (2009). Toward a comprehensive view of the skills involved in word reading in grades 4, 6, and 8. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102, 96–113.Google Scholar
Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218.Google Scholar
Share, D. L. (1999). Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of the self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 95–129.Google Scholar
Share, D. L. (2007). Sources of individual differences in orthographic learning: A comparison of deep and shallow scripts. Unpublished manuscript, University of Haifa, Department of Learning Disabilities.Google Scholar
Share, D. L. (2008). Orthographic learning, phonological recoding, and self-teaching. In R. V. Kail (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (pp. 31–82). New York: Elsevier Academic.Google Scholar
Share, D. L. (2011). On the role of phonology in reading acquisition: The self-teaching hypothesis. In S. A. Brady, D. Braze, C. A. Fowler, S. A. Brady, D. Braze, & C. A. Fowler (Eds.), Explaining individual differences in reading: Theory and evidence (pp. 45–68). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433.Google Scholar
Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Test of word reading efficiency. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Burgess, S., & Hecht, S. (1997). Contributions of phonological awareness and rapid automatic naming ability to the growth of word-reading skills in second- to fifth-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 161–185.Google Scholar
Treiman, R. (2017). Learning to spell words: Findings, theories, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21, 265–276.Google Scholar
Tucker, R., Castles, A., Laroche, A., & Deacon, S. H. (2016). Orthographic learning in self teaching: The extent of transfer. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 145, 79–94.Google Scholar
Tumner, W. E., & Nesdale, A. R. (1985). Phonemic segmentation skill and beginning reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 417–527.Google Scholar
Wagner, R. K., & Barker, T. A. (1994). The development of orthographic processing ability. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), The varieties of orthographic knowledge: I. Theoretical and developmental issues (pp. 243–276). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processing. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
Wang, H., Castles, A., Nickels, L., & Nation, K. (2011). Context effects on orthographic learning of regular and irregular words. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109, 39–57.Google Scholar
Wang, H., Nickels, L., Nation, K., & Castles, A. (2013). Predictors of orthographic learning of regular and irregular words. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 369–384.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1999). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Wolter, J. A., Self, T., & Apel, K. (2011). Initial mental graphemic representation acquisition and later literacy achievement in children with language impairment: A longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 543–555.Google Scholar
Woodcock, R. (1998). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests—Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.Google Scholar
Ziegler, J., Stone, G., & Jacobs, A. (1997). What is the pronunciation for -ough and the spelling for /u/? A database for computing. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 29, 600.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Deacon et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S3

Download Deacon et al. supplementary material(File)
File 32.3 KB