The development of phonological awareness: effects of spoken language experience and orthography

Cheung, Him; Chen, Hsuan-Chih; Lai, Chun; Wong, On Chi; Hills, Melanie

doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(01)00136-6

Cited by 155 publications

(139 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Lukatela, Carello, Shankweiler, and Liberman (1995) used a phoneme monitoring task to demonstrate this: participants listen to words and must identify the total number of sounds within the word. Lukatela et al (1995) found that illiterates are significantly less accurate in this task, showing that their phoneme awareness is not as fine-tuned as the phoneme awareness of literates (see also Cheung, Chen, Yip Lai, Wong, & Hills, 2001;Cheung & Chin, 2004). This may mean that illiterate participants respond to whole word form more than consonant or vowel features in isolation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Phonological and orthographic influences in the bouba–kiki effect

Cuskley

Simner

Kirby

2015

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phonological and orthographic influences in the bouba-kiki effectArticle (Accepted Version) http://sro.sussex.ac.uk Cuskley, Christine, Simner, Julia and Kirby, Simon (2015) Phonological and orthographic influences in the bouba-kiki effect. Psychological This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/63979/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse:Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University.Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Abstract We examine a high-profile phenomenon known as the bouba-kiki effect, in which non-word names are assigned to abstract shapes in systematic ways (e.g. rounded shapes are preferentially labelled bouba over kiki). In a detailed evaluation of the literature, we show that most accounts of the effect point to predominantly or entirely iconic cross-sensory mappings between acoustic or articulatory properties of sound and shape as the mechanism underlying the effect. However, these accounts have tended to confound the acoustic or articulatory properties of nonwords with another fundamental property: their written form. We compare traditional accounts of direct audio or articulatory-visual mapping with an account in which the effect is heavily influenced by matching between the shapes of graphemes and the abstract shape targets. The results of our two studies suggest that the dominant mechanism underlying the effect for literate subjects is matching based on aligning letter curvature and shape roundedness (i.e. non-words with curved letters are matched to round shapes). We show that letter curvature is strong enough to significantly influence word-shape associations even in auditory tasks, where written word forms are never presented to participants. However, we also find an additional phonological influence in that voiced sounds are preferentially linked with rounded shapes, although this arises only in a purely auditory word-shape association task. We conclude that many previous investigations of the bouba-kiki effect may not have given appropriate consideration or weight to the influenc...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Phonological and orthographic influences in the bouba–kiki effect

Cuskley

Simner

Kirby

2015

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, logographic literates should behave more like illiterates on tasks that aim to measure this aspect of processing. There is already substantial empirical evidence within the literature to support such a position with Chinese literates who have not been exposed to an alphabetic writing system displaying reduced levels of phonological awareness (Cheung et al, 2001;Ho & Bryant, 1997;Huang & Hanley, 1995McBride-Chang et al, 2004;Read et al, 1986;Shu et al, 2008). Further, recent evidence from neuroimaging studies support the critical role of orthographic transparency in modulating effects of literacy on speech processing, with less involvement of associated orthographic processing regions observed in logographic literates compared to alphabetic literates when processing speech (Cao et al, 2011) and greater developmental changes in phonological processing regions as a consequence of literacy training in English over Chinese students (Brennan et al, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…phonemes) it has been proposed that explicit training is necessary. Evidence in support of this position comes from observed similarities in processing between illiterates and logographic literates, for example Chinese literates, where there is little systematic correspondence between orthographic representations and the sequence of speech sounds that constitute their spoken form (Brennan, Cao, Pedroarena-Leal, McNorgan, & Booth, 2013;Cao et al, 2011;Cheung, Chen, Lai, Wong, & Hills, 2001;Ho & Bryant, 1997;Huang & Hanley, 1995McBride-Chang, Bialystok, Chong, & Li, 2004;Read, Yun-Fei, Hong-Yin, & Bao-Qing, 1986;Shu, Peng, & McBride-Chang, 2008). …”

Section: Changes To Phonological Representations and Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Literacy effects on language and vision: Emergent effects from an amodal shared resource (ASR) computational model

Smith

Monaghan

Huettig

2014

Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tLearning to read and write requires an individual to connect additional orthographic representations to pre-existing mappings between phonological and semantic representations of words. Past empirical results suggest that the process of learning to read and write (at least in alphabetic languages) elicits changes in the language processing system, by either increasing the cognitive efficiency of mapping between representations associated with a word, or by changing the granularity of phonological processing of spoken language, or through a combination of both. Behavioural effects of literacy have typically been assessed in offline explicit tasks that have addressed only phonological processing. However, a recent eye tracking study compared high and low literate participants on effects of phonology and semantics in processing measured implicitly using eye movements. High literates' eye movements were more affected by phonological overlap in online speech than low literates, with only subtle differences observed in semantics. We determined whether these effects were due to cognitive efficiency and/or granularity of speech processing in a multimodal model of speech processing -the amodal shared resource model (ASR, Smith, Monaghan, & Huettig, 2013a,b). We found that cognitive efficiency in the model had only a marginal effect on semantic processing and did not affect performance for phonological processing, whereas fine-grained versus coarse-grained

show abstract

“…Dissimilar to many Western languages, Chinese adopts a logographic writing system in which each orthographically distinct unit (character) maps directly onto a syllable, but not a phoneme, in its spoken form. Indeed, there is evidence indicating that orthographic experience affects one's phonological awareness (see, e.g., Cheung, Chen, Lai, Wong, & Hills, 2001). Consequently, the Chinese speakers might be less sensitive than the speakers of languages with alphabetic scripts to the similarity between the target and the distractor when they share only a single segment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What are effective phonological units in Cantonese spoken word planning?

Wong

Chen

2009

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two picture-word interference experiments were conducted to investigate the nature of effective phonological units in Cantonese spoken word production. The names of the pictures were Cantonese monosyllables with a consonant vowel consonant (CVC) structure. Participants' picture-naming responses were faster when the target (e.g., "star" /sing1/) and the distractor shared the same CVC component (e.g., /sing4/, meaning "city"), the same CV component (e.g., /sik6/, "eat"), or the same VC component (e.g., /ging2/, "region"), as opposed to when they were unrelated, and the facilitation effects observed were comparable in size. Also, similar facilitation effects were obtained across the CV tone-related and the VC tone-related conditions, whereas no reliable effect was found in the V tone-related condition. These results indicate that an effective phonological unit in spoken word planning is neither a syllable (without tone) nor a segmental unit, and that the possible candidates lie between the two, at least in Cantonese.

show abstract

The development of phonological awareness: effects of spoken language experience and orthography

Cited by 155 publications

References 21 publications

Phonological and orthographic influences in the bouba–kiki effect

Phonological and orthographic influences in the bouba–kiki effect

Literacy effects on language and vision: Emergent effects from an amodal shared resource (ASR) computational model

What are effective phonological units in Cantonese spoken word planning?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About