Encoding speed, rehearsal, and probed recall of dyslexic boys.

Spring, Carl; Capps, Carolyn

doi:10.1037/h0037472

Cited by 183 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Both groups needed more time to name the faees, altbough the differenee favoring adults over ehildren remained on the naming task. Spring and Capps (1974) produced complementary results for 7-to 14-year-olds. See Keating and Bobbitt (1978) for similar developmental results on another task.…”

Section: Speed Of Information Processingsupporting

confidence: 50%

Memory Development Between 2 and 20

Schneider¹,

Pressley²

1989

Springer Series in Cognitive Development

310

261

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Speed Of Information Processingsupporting

confidence: 50%

Memory Development Between 2 and 20

Schneider¹,

Pressley²

1989

Springer Series in Cognitive Development

310

261

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Impaired memory spans have consistently been observed in poor readers (Rugel, 1974), and it is important to determine the source of this difficulty if it is not directly related to whether poor readers use phonological coding in immediate memory. This impairment may well be due to the slowness to name objects, pictures, and colors that has often been observed in poor readers (e.g., Denckla & Rudel, 1976;Spring, 1976;Spring & Capps, 1974). Since several studies have shown that speech rate and naming speeds are directly related to memory span (Case, Kurland, & Goldberg, 1982;Hulme, Thomson, Muir, & Lawrence, 1984), it is probable that poor readers have impaired memory spans because they are slower to encode and rehearse incoming stimuli.…”

Section: Pronunciation Of Easy Nonwordsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of phonological information by good and poor readers in memory and reading tasks

Holligan

Johnston

1988

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been a recent debate about the utilization of phonological information by poor readers in both working memory and reading tasks. The purpose of the first experiment in this study was to examine whether the absence of phonological similarity effects in working memory reported in previous studies was due to inappropriate levels of task difficulty. Poor readers and their reading age controls were found to show a normal effect when the memory task was at an appropriate level of difficulty, but no effect when a large number of items had to be recalled. However, in a recognition memory task, the poor readers chose orthographically similar pairs, whereas the reading-age and chronological age controls chose phonologically similar pairs. The purpose of a final experiment was to determine whether or not the good and poor readers could be differentiated in terms of their reading strategies; both groups showed regularity effects in a naming task and pseudohomophone effects in a lexical decision task. However, although poor readers could read three-letter nonwords as well as their controls, they were significantly impaired in reading more complex one-syllable nonwords. It was concluded that poor readers may have a phonological dysfunction in some aspects of reading that is unrelated to whether or not they show phonological similarity effects in working memory. Impaired segmentation skills may underly their difficulties in both reading and nonreading tasks.Many studies have been carried out in order to examine the idea that poor readers are deficient in utilizing phonological information in both memory and reading tasks. In a review of the literature, Vellutino (1979) has concluded that poor readers are deficient in their use of verbal or phonological information in both short-and long-term memory tasks. Similarly, Frith (1985) has concluded that poor readers suffer primarily from a phonological dysfunction in reading.In the memory literature, a number of studies have shown that poor readers use phonological information less effectively than good readers. Shankweiler, Liberman, Mark, Fowler, and Fischer (1979) demonstrated that 8-year-old poor readers, in a serial order recall task involving memory of letter strings, showed smaller effects of phonological similarity than did chronological age controls. They concluded that poor readers have poorer access to a phonetic code or access to a degraded phonetic representation. A number of other studies have since confirmed these findings. Mann, Liberman, and Shankweiler (1980) showed similar effects when words and sentences were presented for recall, and Siegel and Linder (1984) replicated the Shankweiler et al. findings on 7-to 8-yearold poor readers.We should like to thank the pupils and staff at schools in Dundee and Edinburgh for their assistance. In particular, we should like to thank Johnston (1982), however, found normal effects of phonological similarity in 9-, 12-, and l4-year-old poor readers, and cautiously concluded that such reduced effects must be restricted...

show abstract

“…The speed of retrieving phonological representations was assessed using the digit naming speed task of Spring and Capps (1974;also see Swanson & Alexander, 1997, for a description). This measure involved a continuous list procedure that required children to orally name randomly ordered digits as accurately and quickly as possible.…”

Section: Speed and Phonological Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%