Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Is the deficit in phonological awareness better explained in terms of task differences or effects of syllable structure?

  • JUAN E. JIMÉNEZ (a1), EDUARDO GARCÍA (a1), ROSARIO ORTIZ (a1), ISABEL HERNÁNDEZ–VALLE (a1), REMEDIOS GUZMÁN (a1), MERCEDES RODRIGO (a1), ADELINA ESTÉVEZ (a1), ALICIA DÍAZ (a1) and SERGIO HERNÁNDEZ (a1)...

Abstract

The primary purpose of the study reported here was to explore the effects of the complexity of syllable structure and the effects of task differences in the explanation of deficit in phonological awareness (PA). A sample of 97 subjects was selected and organized into three different groups: 29 reading-disabled (RD) children, 41 normal readers matched in age with the former, and 27 younger normal readers at the same reading level as those with reading disabilities. We administered PA tasks which included items with different complexity of syllable structure. The results showed that the complexity of syllable structure had no particularly marked effect on the dyslexic children. Rather, the isolation task revealed the phonological deficit across all syllable structures.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Departamento de Psicología Evolutiva y de la Educación, Universidad de La Laguna, Campus de Guajara, 38200 Islas Canarias, España. E-mail: ejimenez@ull.es

References

Hide All
Adams M. 1990. Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Arnqvist A. 1992. The impact of consonant clusters on preschool children's phonemic awareness: A comparison between readers and nonreaders. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 33, 2935.
Bryant P. 2002. It doesn't matter whether onset and rime predicts reading better than phoneme awareness does or vice versa. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 4146.
Carrillo M. S. 1994. Development of phonological awareness and reading acquisition. A study in Spanish language. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 6, 279298.
Cattell R. B., & Cattell A. K. S. 1989. Test de Factor “g.” Escala 1 and 2 A. Cordero, M. V. de la Cruz, & N. Seisdedos, Trans.). Madrid: T.E.A. Ediciones. (Original work published 1950).
Chafouleas S., VanAuken T., & Dunham K. 2001. Not all phonemes are created equal: The effects of linguistic manipulations on phonological awareness tests. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 19, 216226.
Cuetos F., Rodríguez B., & Ruano E. 1996. Batería de evaluación de los procesos lectores de los niños de educación primaria (PROLEC). [Assessment test of reading skills for children]. Madrid: T.E.A. Ediciones.
Daneman M., & Carpenter P. A. 1980. Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450466.
de Jong P. F., & van der Leij A. 2003. Developmental changes in the manifestation of a phonological deficit in dyslexic children learning to read a regular orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 2240.
de Vega M., Carreiras M., Gutiérrez M., & Alonso–Quecuty M. L. 1990. Lectura y comprensión. Una perspectiva cognitiva [Reading and comprehension. A cognitive approach]. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
Escribano J. L. 1991. Programa UNICEN [UNICEN software]. Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain: Author.
Goswami U. 2002. In the beginning was the rhyme? A reflection on Hulme, Hatcher, Nation, Brown, Adams, and Stuart (2002). Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 4757.
Goswami U., & Bryant P. E. 1990. Phonological skills and learning to read. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Guzmán R., & Jiménez J. E. 2001. Estudio normativo sobre parámetros psicolingísticos en niños de 6 a 8 años: La familiaridad subjetiva [Statistical study about psycholinguistic parameters in children from 6 to 8 years old: Word familiarity]. Cognitiva, 13, 153191.
Høien T., Lundberg I., Stanovich K. E., & Bjaalid I. K. 1995. Components of phonological awareness. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 7, 171188.
Hulme C., Hatcher P., Nation K., Brown A., Adams J., & Stuart G. 2002. Phoneme awareness is a better predictor of early reading skill than onset-rime awareness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 228.
Jiménez J. E. 1995. Evaluación de la conciencia fonológica [Test of phonemic awareness]. In J. E. Jiménez & M. R. Ortiz (Eds.), Conciencia fonológica y aprendizaje de la lectura [Phonological awareness and learning to read] (pp. 7478). Madrid: Síntesis.
Jiménez J. E. 1997. A reading-level match study of phonemic processes underlying reading disabilities in a transparent orthography. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9, 2340.
Jiménez J. E., Alvarez C., Estévez A., & Hernández–Valle I. 2000. Onset-rimes units in visual word recognition in Spanish normal readers and reading disabled children. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 135141.
Jiménez J. E., Díaz A., Ortiz M. R., Rodrigo M., García E., Guzmán R., Hernández–Valle I., Estévez A., & Hernández S. G. 2002. SICOLE: Un sistema de evaluación de procesos cognitivos en la dislexia mediante ayuda asistida a través de ordenador [SICOLE: A system in assessing cognitive processes in dyslexia in the Spanish language] [Computer software]. Universidad La Laguna: Authors.
Jiménez J. E., & Haro C. 1995. Effects of word linguistic properties on phonological awareness in Spanish children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 193201.
Jiménez J. E., & Hernández–Valle I. 2000. Word identification and reading disorders in the Spanish language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 267275.
Jiménez J. E. & Ortiz M. R. 1993. Phonological awareness in learning literacy. Cognitiva, 5, 153170.
Jiménez J. E., & Ortiz M. R. 2000. Metalinguistic awareness and reading acquisition in the Spanish language. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 3, 3746.
Jiménez J. E., & Ramírez G. 2002. Identifying subtypes of reading disabilities in the Spanish language. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 5, 319.
Jiménez J. E., & Venegas E. 2004. Defining phonological awareness and its relationship to reading skills in low literacy adults. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 798810.
Kail R. 1991. Developmental changes in speed of processing during childhood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 490501.
Landerl K., & Wimmer H. 2000. Deficits in phoneme segmentation are not the core problem of dyslexia: Evidence from German and English children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 243262.
Landerl K., Wimmer H., & Frith U. 1997. The impact of orthographic consistency on dyslexia: A German–English comparison. Cognition, 63, 315334.
Liberman I., & Shankweiler D. 1977. Speech, the alphabet and teaching to read. In L. B. Resnick & P. A. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (pp. 105129). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Liberman I., Shankweiler D., Fischer F., & Carter B. 1974. Explicit syllable and phoneme segmentation in the young child. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 18, 201212.
Lundberg I., Frost J., & Petersen O. P. 1988. Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in preschool children. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 263284.
McBride–Chang C. 1995. What is phonological awareness? Journal of Educational Psychology, 2, 179192.
McMillan B. M. 2002. Rhyme and reading: A critical review of the research methodology. Journal of Research in Reading, 25, 442.
Morais J. 1991. Phonological awareness: A bridge between language and literacy. In D. J. Sawyer & B. J. Fox (Eds.), Phonological awareness in reading. The evolution of current perspectives (pp. 3171). New York: Springer–Verlag.
Olson R. K. 1994. Language deficits in specific reading disability. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 895916). New York: Academic Press.
Rack J. P., Snowling M. J., & Olson R. 1992. The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: A review. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 2953.
Schreuder R., & van Bon W. 1989. Phonemic analysis: Effects of word properties. Journal of Research in Reading, 12, 5978.
Siegel L., & Ryan E. B. 1989. The development of working memory in normally achieving and subtypes of learning disabled children. Child Development, 60, 973980.
Stahl S. A., & Murray B. A. 1994. Defining phonological awareness and its relationship to early reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 221234.
Treiman R. 1991. Phonological awareness and its roles in learning to read and spell. In D. J. Sawyer & B. J. Fox (Eds.), Phonological awareness in reading. The evolution of current perspectives (pp. 159189). New York: Springer–Verlag.
Treiman R. 1992. The role of intrasyllabic units in learning to read and spell. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman, Reading acquisition (pp. 65106). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Treiman R., & Weatherston S. 1992. Effects of linguistic structure on children's ability to isolate initial consonants. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 174181.
Treiman R., & Zukowsky A. 1991. Levels of phonological awareness. In S. A. Brady & D. Shankweiler (Eds.), Phonological processes in literacy. A tribute to Isabelle Y. Liberman (pp. 6783). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tunmer W. E., & Herriman M. 1984. The development of metalinguistic awareness: A conceptual overview. In W. E. Tunmer, C. Pratt, & M. L. Herriman (Eds.), Metalinguistic awareness in children (pp. 1235). Berlin: Springer–Verlag.
Tunmer W. E., & Rohl M. 1991. Phonological awareness and reading acquisition. In D. J. Sawyer & B. J. Fox (Eds.), Phonological awareness in reading. The evolution of current perspectives (pp. 130). New York: Springer–Verlag.
Wimmer H., Mayringer H., & Landerl K. 2000. The double-deficit hypothesis and difficulties in learning to read a regular orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 668680.
Yopp H. K. 1988. The validity and reliability of phonemic awareness tests. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 159177.

Is the deficit in phonological awareness better explained in terms of task differences or effects of syllable structure?

  • JUAN E. JIMÉNEZ (a1), EDUARDO GARCÍA (a1), ROSARIO ORTIZ (a1), ISABEL HERNÁNDEZ–VALLE (a1), REMEDIOS GUZMÁN (a1), MERCEDES RODRIGO (a1), ADELINA ESTÉVEZ (a1), ALICIA DÍAZ (a1) and SERGIO HERNÁNDEZ (a1)...

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed