Are Dyslexic Children Sensitive to the Morphological Structure of Words When They Read? The Case of Dyslexic Readers of French

Abstract

Typically, research has cited a deficient use of word recognition procedures mainly caused by a phonological deficit as the source of dyslexic students' reading difficulties. However, recent studies have shown that morphological processing also plays an important part in reading. In the present study, sensitivity to the morphological structure of words was assessed with a plausibility judgment task, where participants determined which of two pseudo-words most resembled a real word in French, and with a decomposition task requiring participants to extract the base forms of morphologically complex words. Dyslexic participants (DYS, n = 26) aged 9-12 years were matched to 26 participants of the same chronological age (CA) and 30 younger participants of the same reading age (RA). Overall, the decomposition task was less successful at demonstrating morphological knowledge than the plausibility judgment task. Results indicate that dyslexic participants demonstrated some morphological sensitivity, particularly on the plausibility task, but were outperformed by both control groups on both tasks. Performance on morphological tasks was significantly correlated to reading comprehension scores. More research needs to be carried out to better comprehend the effects of task characteristics on dyslexic participants' success and before claiming a different or deviant developmental path for morphological knowledge.

Cracking the Code: The Impact of Orthographic Transparency and Morphological-Syllabic Complexity on Reading and Developmental Dyslexia

“…This is in sharp contrast to Quémart and Casalis (2015) results that showed that dyslexic French children have developed representations for written morphology and that these representations are activated rapidly and automatically during visual recognition of morphologically complex words. Berthiaume and Daigle (2014) did note some morphological sensitivity among their French dyslexic children aged 9–12 years but also that they were outperformed by both reading-level and same-age peers. The lack of consistency in the results described may be due to methodological differences, such as selected tasks and age or control groups.…”

“…Reading is a complex activity requiring the processing of graphic information in order to achieve optimal text comprehension (Berthiaume and Daigle, 2014). The simple view of reading, a model suggested by Gough and Tunmer (1986) and Hoover and Gough (1990), in short holds that reading comprehension skills can be predicted from two components: decoding abilities, defined as efficient visual word recognition, and linguistic comprehension, which is the ability to use information at the lexical or word level to achieve sentence and discourse interpretations (Hoover and Gough, 1990).…”

“…Yet another important aspect of word segmentation involves morphological processing, which is the focus of an increasing number of studies (e.g., Mahony et al, 2000; Schiff and Raveh, 2007). Several papers also included analyses of morphological processing in struggling readers such as dyslexics (e.g., Casalis et al, 2004; Burani et al, 2008; Siegel, 2008) and suggest that a deficient development of some of the processes related to word recognition can partially explain the reading difficulties of dyslexic readers (Berthiaume and Daigle, 2014). Although it is unlikely that dyslexic readers can become skilled readers without developing efficient phonological processing skills, they may compensate for their phonological deficit during visual word recognition by processing at the morpheme level (e.g., Elbro and Arnbak, 1996; Casalis et al, 2004; Leikin and Hagit, 2006).…”

Les effets d’un dispositif d’enseignement du vocabulaire pluridimensionnel et multimodal sur les connaissances lexicales d’élèves en quatrième primaire

“…Le phonème à l'oral, le graphème à l'écrit, la syllabe orale ou écrite et le morphème oral ou écrit constituent des unités sublexicales qui permettent de former des mots (Ziegler & Goswami, 2005). La sensibilité du lecteur/scripteur à ces types d'unités sublexicales orales et écrites est essentielle au développement de la lecture et de l'écriture, comme l'ont montré de nombreuses recherches (voir, par exemple, Berninger, Abbott, Nagy & Carlisle, 2010 ;Berthiaume & Daigle, 2014 ;Caravolas & Landerl, 2010). La connaissance du sens d'un mot renvoie aux concepts et aux référents qui y sont associés.…”

Effects of Orthographic, Morphological and Semantic Overlap on Short-Term Memory for Words in Typical and Atypical Development

“…Children with dyslexia have been shown to perform below chronological-age-(CA-) matched peers on morphological awareness measures in many languages (Berthiaume & Daigle, 2014;Carlisle, 1987;Casalis et al, 2004;Duranovic, Tinjak, & Turbic-Hadzagic, 2014;Egan & Pring, 2004;Egan & Tainturier, 2011;Joanisse, Manis, Keating, & Seidenberg, 2000;Leong, 1999;McBride-Chang et al, 2008;McBride-Chang, Liu, Wong, Wong, & Shu, 2012;Shu, McBride-Chang, Wu, & Liu, 2006;Siegel, 2008;Tsesmeli & Seymour, 2006;Vogel, 1977). They have also been shown to use morphological processes (in reading and spelling) less than age-matched peers Carlisle, Stone, & Katz, 2001;Fisher, Shankweiler, & Liberman, 1985;Hauerwas & Walker, 2003;Leong, 1989).…”