Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:23:11.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolution of the missing-letter effect among young readers between ages 5 and 8

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 October 2010

DENIS FOUCAMBERT  and
JACQUES BAILLÉ
DENIS FOUCAMBERT*
Affiliation:
Université du Québec à Montréal
JACQUES BAILLÉ
Affiliation:
Université P. Mendès France, Grenoble
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Denis Foucambert, Département de linguistique, Université du Québec à Montréal, C.P. 8888, succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, QC H3C 3P8, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In light of the numerous studies on the detection of target letters among adults, it is generally accepted that the missing-letter effect depends both on a given word's frequency in its language and on its role (function vs. content) in a sentence. Following a presentation of several models explaining these observations we analyze the results of a letter-detection task given to 886 French students from kindergarten to second grade. The purpose of the present study is to determine the moment when the sensitivity to content/function word distinction emerges. The results of this study reveal that even if word frequency plays a role in letter detection, the emergence of an ability to extract sentence structure, along the lines of the structural model of reading, is significantly linked to the initial stages of explicit reading instruction.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 1 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baker, L., Fernandez-Fein, S., Scher, D., & Williams, H. (1998). Home experiences related to the development of word recognition. In Metsala, J. L. & Ehri, L. C. (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 263–386). London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bus, A. G., van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy. Review of Educational Research, 65, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., & Rayner, K. (1983). What your eyes do while your mind is reading. In Raynor, K. (Ed.), Eye movements in reading: Perceptual and language processes (pp. 275–307). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Corcoran, D. W. (1966). An acoustic factor in letter cancellation. Nature, 210, 658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cunningham, T. F., Healy, A. F., Kanengiser, N., Chizzick, L., & Willitts, R. L. (1988). Investigating the boundaries of reading units across ages and reading levels. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 45, 175–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drewnowski, A. (1978). Detection errors on the word the: Evidence for the acquisition of reading levels. Memory & Cognition, 6, 403–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drewnowski, A. (1981). Missing -ing in reading: Developmental changes in readings units. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31, 154–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drewnowski, A., & Healy, A. F. (1982). Phonetic factors in letter detection: A reevaluation. Memory & Cognition, 10, 145–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foucambert, D. (2008). Vision parafovéale et extraction précoce de la structure des phrases durant la lecture. Psychologie Française, 53, 259–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, S., Healy, A. F., Koriat, A., & Kreiner, H. (2004). The GO model: A reconsideration of the role of structural units in guiding and organizing text on line. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11, 428–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, S. N., Koriat, A., & Shapiro, A. (1992). The effects of syntactic structure on letter detection in adjacent function words. Memory & Cognition, 20, 663–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenberg, S. N., Koriat, A., & Vellutino, F. R. (1998). Age changes in the missing-letter effect reflect the reader's growing ability to extract the structure from text. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 69, 175–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gross, J., Treiman, R., & Inman, J. (2000). The role of phonology in a letter detection task. Memory & Cognition, 28, 349–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, A. F. (1976). Detection errors on the word the: Evidence for reading units larger than letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 235–242.Google ScholarPubMed
Healy, A. F. (1994). Letter detection: A window to unitization and other cognitive processes in reading texts. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 333–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, A. F., & Drewnowski, A. (1983). Investigating the boundaries of reading units: Letter detection in misspelled words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 413–426.Google ScholarPubMed
Healy, A. F., Oliver, W. L., & McNamara, T. P. (1987). Detecting letters in continuous text: Effects of display size. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 279–290.Google ScholarPubMed
Kennedy, A. (2000). Parafoveal processing in word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 429–455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koriat, A., & Greenberg, S. N. (1991). Syntactic control of letter detection: Evidence from English and Hebrew nonwords. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 1035–1050.Google Scholar
Koriat, A., & Greenberg, S. N. (1993). Prominence of leading factors in function morpheme sequences as evidenced by letter detection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 34–59.Google Scholar
Koriat, A., & Greenberg, S. N. (1994). The extraction of phrase structure during reading: Evidence from letter detection errors. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 345–356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koriat, A., & Greenberg, S. N. (1996). The enhancement effect in letter detection: Further evidence for the structural model of reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1184–1195.Google Scholar
Koriat, A., Greenberg, S. N., & Goldshmid, Y. (1991). The missing-letter effect in Hebrew: Word frequency or word function? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 66–80.Google Scholar
Lambert, E., & Chesnet, D. (2001). Novlex: Une base de données lexicales pour les élèves de primaire. L'Année Psychologique, 101, 277–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nazir, T. A., Jacobs, A. M., & O'Regan, J. K. (1998). Letter legibility and visual word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 26, 810–821.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
New, B., Pallier, C., Ferrand, L., & Matos, R. (2001). Une base de données lexicales du français contemporain sur internet: LEXIQUE™. L'Année Psychologique, 101, 447–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OCDE. (2000). Mesurer les connaissances et les compétences des élèves: Lecture, mathématiques et science: L'évaluation de PISA 2000. Paris: Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques.Google Scholar
OCDE. (2001). Connaissances et compétences: des atouts pour la vie. Premiers résultats du programme international de l'OCDE pour le suivi des acquis des élèves (PISA) 2000. Paris: Les éditions de l'OCDE.Google Scholar
O'Regan, J. K. (1979). Saccade size control in reading: Evidence for the linguistic control hypothesis. Perception and Psychophysics, 25, 501–509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Regan, J. K., & Jacobs, A. M. (1992). Optimal viewing position effect in word recognition: A challenge to current theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 185–197.Google Scholar
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., & Coltheart, M. (1987). Eye movements in reading: A tutorial review. In Coltheart, M. (Ed.), Attention and performance: Vol. 12. The psychology of reading (pp. 327–362). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Roy-Charland, A., & Saint-Aubin, J. (2006). The interaction of word frequency and word class: A test of the GO model's account of the missing-letter effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy-Charland, A., Saint-Aubin, J., Klein, R. M., & Lawrence, M. (2007). Eye movements as direct tests of the go model for the missing-letter effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 69, 324–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saint-Aubin, J., & Klein, K. (2008). The influence of reading skills on the missing-letter effect among elementary school students. Reading Research Quarterly, 43, 132–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saint-Aubin, J., Klein, R. M., & Landry, T. (2005). Age changes in the missing-letter effect revisited. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 91, 158–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saint-Aubin, J., Roy-Charland, A., & Klein, K. (2007). The influence of multiple readings on the missing-letter effect revisited. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1578.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Solotareff, G. (2001). Contes d'été. Paris: Ecole des Loisirs.Google Scholar
Vitu, F. (1991). The influence of parafoveal processing in linguistic context on the optimal landing position effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 58–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitu, F., O'Regan, J. K., Inhoff, A. W., & Topolski, R. (1995). Mindless reading: Eye-movement characteristics are similar in scanning letter strings and reading texts. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 352–364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
White, S. J., Rayner, K., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). The influence of parafoveal word length and contextual constraint on fixation durations and word skipping in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 466–471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed