Unpacking the unique relationship between set for variability and word reading development: Examining word- and child-level predictors of performance.

Abstract

Set for variability (SfV) is an oral language task that requires an individual to disambiguate the mismatch between the decoded form of an irregular word and its actual lexical pronunciation. For example, in the task, the word wasp is pronounced to rhyme with clasp (i.e. /waesp/), and the individual must recognize the actual pronunciation of the word to be /wɒsp/. SfV has been shown to be a significant predictor of both item-specific and general word reading variance above and beyond that associated with phonemic awareness skill, letter-sound knowledge, and vocabulary skill. However, very little is known about the child characteristics and word features that affect SfV item performance. In this study, we explored whether word features and child characteristics that involve phonology only are adequate to explain item-level variance in SfV performance or whether including predictors that involve the connection between phonology and orthography explains additional variance. To accomplish this, we administered the SfV task (N = 75 items) to a sample of grade 2-5 children (N = 489), along with a battery of reading, reading related, and language measures. Results suggest that variance in SfV performance is uniquely accounted for by measures tapping phonological skill along with those capturing knowledge of phonology to orthography associations, but more so in children with better decoding skill. Additionally, word reading skill was found to moderate the influence of other predictors suggesting that how the task is approached may be impacted by word reading and decoding ability. Educational Impact and Implications StatementSet for variability (SfV) is a powerful predictor of word recognition skill in developing readers. The measure taps children's ability to go from the decoded form of a word (e.g., /wˆz/for was) to the correct form (e.g., /wɒz/ for was), which is considered an important second step in word decoding. In the current study, we worked to determine what factors lead to variability in children's ability to perform the task. We found that performance on the SfV task was highly correlated with children's phonemic awareness skill and also related to their reading and decoding skill. This suggests that children with advanced reading and decoding skill may be using both phonological and spelling skills to go from the decoded form of a word to the correct pronunciation. The findings suggest that further studies evaluating the causal influence of SfV on reading development are warranted.

Does Spanish knowledge contribute to accurate English word spelling in adult bilinguals?

“…Also supporting the lexical quality hypothesis is a consistently significant contribution from general SfV (i.e., total number of dependent spelling words correctly recognized from their decoded pronunciation) and item-specific SfV (i.e., ability to correctly recognize a specific word from its decoded pronunciation) to spelling accuracy in all interaction models. This finding aligns with Perfetti and Hart's (2001) assumption that formation of a high-quality representation relies on storing redundant phonological representations, including at least one that is recoverable from regular orthographic-tophonological mappings (see Edwards, Steacy, Siegelman, Rigobon, Kearns, Rueckl & Compton, 2022;Elbro, 1998;Elbro & Jensen, 2005;Goswami, 2000). For the whole sample, the SfV contributions can be interpreted as a more highly skilled speller having a higher quality orthographic representation of a given familiar spelling word that allows for recognition of that word's decoded pronunciation heard in the SfV task (i.e., a second plausible pronunciation based on orthographic-to-phonological mappings), likely as a result of an item-specific encounter (i.e., having successfully decoded the specific word before) given the low frequency of the spelling words tested in this sample.…”

Set for Variability as a Critical Predictor of Word Reading: Potential Implications for Early Identification and Treatment of Dyslexia

“…That is, when a child is presented with a mispronounced word in the SfV task, they may use phonology-to-orthography associations to "translate" the mispronounced spoken word into an orthographic form, a process we refer to as orthographic facilitation, from which they can access the correct phonological form associated with the orthographic form stored in memory. Consistent with this view, Edwards et al (2022) reported that children with better decoding skills are likely Note. Intercept and slope (set for variability [SfV]) coefficients are presented for quantile regressions at the .25, .50, and .75 quantiles.…”

“…Thus, the probability that a child will correctly decode an unfamiliar letter string depends on the decoding knowledge of the reader, the regularity of the orthographic-to-phonological relationships of the word, and the ability of the reader to bridge any differences between the decoded form and the correct phonological form stored in memory. The "distance" between the decoded and actual phonological form of the word affects the probability that a developing reader will successfully make the match between them (see Edwards et al, 2022). Furthermore, the availability of top-down support, either through activation of the stored phonological form (e.g., Duff & Hulme, 2012;Wang et al, 2013) or meaning (Ouellette & Fraser, 2009), likely aids a child in determining the exact pronunciation of a novel letter string on the basis of a partial decoding attempt, suggesting lexical support in orthographic learning under conditions of decoding ambiguity (see Wang et al, 2012Wang et al, , 2013.…”

“…In this case, the terms decoded form and spelling pronunciation can be thought of as synonymous. 2 This sample has previously been used to explore child-and word-level predictors of SfV item performance(Edwards et al, 2022). Many of these students either had idenitifed dyslexia or poor word reading.3 Note that there was only one overlapping item (island) between this SfV task and the word reading items on the WJ-III WID measure.4 Given the makeup of the sample in this study, we ran analyses on the entire sample and broken down by school type (public vs. specialized) and by grade.…”

Flexible phonics: a complementary ‘next generation’ approach for teaching early reading

“…We now have good evidence that this flexible ability to adjust from a 'spelling pronunciation' derived from sequentially applying common phonic rules (e.g. 'c'-'a'-'t' or 'w'-'a'-'s') to then derive the standard pronunciation of both regular and exception words (i.e., 'cat' and 'was'), marks out the most capable readers and young children who will go on to be stronger readers (e.g., Edwards et al, 2022;Elbro et al, 2012;Kearns et al, 2016;Steacy et al, 2016Tunmer and Chapman, 2012). Edwards et al (2022), show that this mental flexibility in phonics is one of the strongest predictors of word reading, and that the likelihood of a capable phonic decoder reading a given exception word reflects in large part the distance between that word's conventional and spelling pronunciations.…”