Didn't You Run the Spell Checker? Effects of Type of Spelling Error and Use of a Spell Checker on Perceptions of the Author

Figueredo, Lauren; Varnhagen, Connie K.

doi:10.1080/02702710500400495

Cited by 57 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, spelling is not to be overlooked, as recent studies suggest that poor spelling leads to poor perceptions of a person’s overall writing abilities (Figueredo & Varnhagen, 2005; Kreiner, Schnakenberg, Green, Costello, & McClin, 2002). Contrary to traditional views, spelling involves more than memorizing letter sequences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reading, Writing, and Phonological Processing Skills of Adolescents With 10 or More Years of Cochlear Implant Experience

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reading, Writing, and Phonological Processing Skills of Adolescents With 10 or More Years of Cochlear Implant Experience

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Deaf children's spelling is also poorer than that of hearing children (Allman, 2002;Burden & Campbell, 1994;Gates & Chase, 1926;Harris & Moreno, 2004;Sutcliffe, Dowker, & Campbell, 1999;Watson, 2002). Even in this age of Twitter and texting, errors in written spelling can lead to negative perceptions about a writer's abilities (Figueredo & Varnhagen, 2005;Kreiner, Schnakenberg, Green, Costello, & McClin, 2002;Varnhagen, 2000), and poor literacy skills are linked to later economic and employment success (e.g., Kutner et al, 2007). Thus, it is important to study spelling skills, particularly those of deaf children, who may have limited educational and employment opportunities if their literacy development is significantly delayed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Spelling of Deaf Children Who Use Cochlear Implants

Hayes

Kessler

Treiman

2011

Scientific Studies of Reading

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The spellings of 39 profoundly deaf users of cochlear implants, aged 6 to 12 years, were compared with those of 39 hearing peers. When controlled for age and reading ability, the error rates of the 2 groups were not significantly different. Both groups evinced phonological spelling strategies, performing better on words with more typical sound-spelling correspondences and often making misspellings that were phonologically plausible. However, the magnitude of these phonological effects was smaller for the deaf children than for hearing children of comparable reading and spelling ability. Deaf children with cochlear implants made the same low proportion of transposition errors as hearing children. The findings indicate that deaf children do not rely primarily on visual memorization strategies, as suggested by previous studies. However, deaf children with cochlear implants use phonological spelling strategies to a lesser degree than hearing peers.For people who have early hearing loss, achieving average literacy levels by adulthood is a difficult task. The median reading comprehension skills for deaf 17-year-olds in the United States is at a fourth-grade (9-year-old) level, a delay of about 8 years (Holt, 1993;Traxler, 2000). Deaf children's spelling is also poorer than that of hearing children (Allman

show abstract

“…Although research clearly has demonstrated that children with SLI have compromised literacy outcomes (Catts, Fey, Tomblin, & Zhang, 2002), research on spelling outcomes in particular has been limited. Poor spelling is associated with poor academic performance, as well as negative perception of an individual's general capabilities including intelligence and attention to detail (Figueredo & Varnhagen, 2005; Marshall & Powers, 1969). In light of the poor spelling performance of children with SLI as well as the sparse research base on mechanisms underlying poor spelling outcomes for this population, there is a need for increased study of the spelling skills of children with SLI.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Utility of the Spelling Sensitivity Score to analyze spellings of children with specific language impairment

Werfel

Krimm

2015

Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of the Spelling Sensitivity Score (SSS) beyond percentage correct scoring in analysing the spellings of children with specific language impairment (SLI). Participants were 31 children with SLI and 28 children with typical language in grades 2 through 4. Spellings of individual words were scored using two methods: (a) percentage correct and (b) SSS. Children with SLI scored lower than children with typical language when spelling was analysed with percentage correct scoring and with SSS scoring. Additionally, SSS scoring highlighted group differences in the nature of spelling errors. Children with SLI were more likely than children with typical language to omit elements and to represent elements with an illegal grapheme in words, whereas children with typical language were more likely than children with SLI to represent all elements with correct letters.

show abstract

Didn't You Run the Spell Checker? Effects of Type of Spelling Error and Use of a Spell Checker on Perceptions of the Author

Cited by 57 publications

References 10 publications

Reading, Writing, and Phonological Processing Skills of Adolescents With 10 or More Years of Cochlear Implant Experience

Reading, Writing, and Phonological Processing Skills of Adolescents With 10 or More Years of Cochlear Implant Experience

Spelling of Deaf Children Who Use Cochlear Implants

Utility of the Spelling Sensitivity Score to analyze spellings of children with specific language impairment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About