Locus of the Context Effect in Children's Word Recognition

Schwantes, Frederick M.

doi:10.2307/1129092

Cited by 32 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first hypothesis for the normal reader's decline in the phonetic effect was suggested by two recent developmental studies that found a decrease with age in the role of phonological codes in lexical access (Doctor & Coltheart, 1980;Schwantes, 1981). If this was true for our older normal subjects, their smaller phonetic effect could be associated with developmental differences in word decoding processes in reading rather than a general decline in the use of phonetic codes in memory, independent from reading.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 85%

Development of phonetic memory in disabled and normal readers

Olson¹,

Davidson²,

Kliegl³

et al. 1984

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development of phonetic memory in disabled and normal readers U n i v e r s i t ä t P o t s d a mHumanwissenschaftliche Fakultät Most contemporary researchers agree that reading is parasitic on language and that individual differences in reading ability are related to differences in language skills (cf. Frith, 1981;Gleitman & Rozin, 1977; Shankweiler & Liberman, 1976; Vellutino, 1977 Vellutino, , 1979. Support for this view has been provided by several recent studies of memory for linguistic stimuli, reviewed below, wherein normal readers showed significant evidence of phonetic memory codes while disabled readers did not. However, this research has been confined to young readers in the second grade. Little is known about the development of memory codes and their association with reading

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 85%

Development of phonetic memory in disabled and normal readers

Olson¹,

Davidson²,

Kliegl³

et al. 1984

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Temporally prior processes of word recognition compete for resources with later comprehension processes (syntactic, semantic, discourse level). Schwantes (1981) showed that children, when they read, rely more on context than do adults, and he attributed this difference to the children's less effective word-decoding processes. Recently, Perfetti ( 1994) summarized the reading research on context and concluded that no studies show a greater context effect for skilled readers.…”

Section: Phonetic Perception and Word Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech perception without hearing

Bernstein

Tucker

Demorest

2000

Perception & Psychophysics

201

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study of visual phonetic speech perception without accompanying auditory speech stimuli, adults with normal hearing (NH; n = 96) and with severely to profoundly impaired hearing (IH;n = 72) identified consonant-vowel (CV)nonsense syllables and words in isolation and in sentences. The measures of phonetic perception were the proportion of phonemes correct and the proportion of transmitted feature information for CVs, the proportion of phonemes correct for words, and the proportion of phonemes correct and the amount of phoneme substitution entropy for sentences. The results demonstrated greater sensitivity to phonetic information in the IH group. Transmitted feature information was related to isolated word scores for the IH group, but not for the NH group. Phoneme errors in sentences were more systematic in the IH than in the NH group. Individual differences in phonetic perception for CVs were more highly associated with word and sentence performance for the IH than for the NH group. The results suggest that the necessity to perceive speech without hearing can be associated with enhanced visual phonetic perception in some individuals.Viewing a talker is generally thought to afford extremely impoverished phonetic information, even though visual speech stimuli are known to influence heard speech (see, e.g

show abstract

“…Investigations of this notion have led to the formulation of the interactivecompensatory model of reading (Stanovich, 1980). According to this model, interactive effects occur through the formation of expectancies which are compensatory in nature, that is, higher level processes affect lower level processes under conditions in which the lower level processes (such as word recognition) are nonautomatic and/or are slowed, for example, due to the degradation of visual features (Stanovich & West, 1979) or to the lack of fluent reading skill (Schwantes, 1981). During compensatory processing in young readers, it is assumed that an attentional expectancy mechanism becomes operable which utilizes prior contextual information to generate specific word expectancies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Children's Use of Semantic and Syntactic Information for Word Recognition and Determination of Sentence Meaningfulness

Schwantes

1991

Journal of Reading Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Third-, sixth-, and college-grade students were presented with entire sentences for silent reading and were asked to monitor these sentences either for the presence of nonwords or for meaningfulness. The sentence forms were of three types: semantically coherent, syntactically intact (but nonmeaningful), and incoherent (nonmeaningful, nongrammatical). Three developmental differences were obtained in the speed of analyzing these sentences for words/nonwords versus meaningfulness/nonmeaningfulness. First, facilitation produced by the addition of semantic information (semantically coherent sentence condition) to syntactic information (syntactically intact condition) during word level analysis was greater for children as compared to adults. Second, the addition of syntactic information to nongrammatical incoherent strings of words again facilitated word level analysis for the children. Third, the difference in decision speed between monitoring sentences for words versus meaningfulness was negligible for adults, but was very robust for children. These results are consistent with the notion that sentential (syntactic as well as semantic) information is relied upon to a relatively greater extent by children, as compared to adults, for word level analyses. Adult readers, on the other hand, appear to utilize syntactic and semantic information as much at the level of sentential analysis as at the level of word recognition.Investigations of reading skill development have been conducted within a variety of different reading models. The various models share the common notion that processing written text takes place at many different levels and utilizes a number of different informational sources. For example, visual information is analyzed, individual words are recognized, syntactical relationships are evaluated, meanings of words are combined, and an overall meaning of the text is ascertained. Hypothesized relationships between these levels of text processing have served as the impe-335

show abstract

Locus of the Context Effect in Children's Word Recognition

Cited by 32 publications

References 0 publications

Development of phonetic memory in disabled and normal readers

Development of phonetic memory in disabled and normal readers

Speech perception without hearing

Children's Use of Semantic and Syntactic Information for Word Recognition and Determination of Sentence Meaningfulness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About