Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:18:48.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Computer Speech-Based Remediation for Reading Disabilities: The Size of Spelling-to-Sound Unit in a Transparent Orthography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2014

Juan E. Jiménez ,
Isabel Hernández-Valle ,
Gustavo Ramírez ,
Mª del Rosario Ortiz ,
Mercedes Rodrigo ,
Adelina Estévez ,
Isabel O'Shanahan ,
Eduardo García  and
María de la Luz Trabaue
Juan E. Jiménez*
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Laguna
Isabel Hernández-Valle
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Laguna
Gustavo Ramírez
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Laguna
Mª del Rosario Ortiz
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Laguna
Mercedes Rodrigo
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Laguna
Adelina Estévez
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Laguna
Isabel O'Shanahan
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Laguna
Eduardo García
Affiliation:
Free University Amsterdam
María de la Luz Trabaue
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Laguna
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Juan E. Jiménez, Departamento de Psicología Evolutiva y de la Educación, Universidad de La Laguna, Campus de Guajara, 38200 Islas Canarias, España. Phone 34-(9)22-317545 fax 34(9)22-317461. E-mail: ejimenez@ull.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study was designed to assess the effects of four reading-training procedures for children with reading disabilities (RD) in a transparent orthography, with the aim of examining the effects of different spelling-to-sound units in computer speech-based reading. We selected a sample of 83 Spanish children aged between 7 years 1 month and 10 years 6 months (M = 105.2, SD = 7.8) whose pseudoword reading performance was below the 25th percentile and IQ > 90. The participants were randomly assigned to five groups: (a) the whole-word training group (WW) (n = 17), (b) the syllable training group (S)(n = 16), (c) the onset-rime training group (OR) (n = 17), (d) the phoneme training group (P) (n = 15), and (e) the untrained control group (n = 18). Children were pre- and post-tested in word recognition, reading comprehension, phonological awareness, and orthographic and phonological tasks. The results indicate that experimental groups who participated in the phoneme and syllable conditions improved their word recognition in comparison with the control group. In addition, dyslexics who participated in the phoneme, syllable, and onset-rime conditions made a greater number of requests during computer-based word reading under conditions that required extensive phonological computation (low frequency words and long words). Reading time, however, was greater for long words in the phoneme group during computer-based reading. These results suggest the importance of training phonological processes in improving word decoding in children with dyslexia who learn in a consistent orthography.

Esta investigación fue diseñada para evaluar los efectos de la instrucción asistida a través de ordenador en los procesos fonológicos y de lectura en niños con dificultades de aprendizaje en la lectura (DAL) en una ortografía transparente. Para ello se manipularon diferentes tipos de unidades lingüísticas con objeto de analizar con cuál de ellas se consiguen mejores resultados. Se seleccionó una muestra de 83 niños españoles de edades comprendidas entre los 7 años y 1 mes y 10 años y 6 meses (edad M = 105.2; DT = 7.8) que presentaban una puntuación en lectura de pseudopalabras por debajo del percentil 25 y un cociente intelectual mayor que 90. Los sujetos fueron distribuidos al azar en cinco grupos diferentes: (a) instrucción basada en reconocimiento de palabras (WW) (n = 17), (b) instrucción basada en reconocimiento de sílabas (S) (n = 16), (c) instrucción basada en reconocimiento de principio-rima (OR) (n = 17), (d) instrucción basada en reconocimiento de fonemas (P) (n =15), y (e) ningún tipo de instrucción (n = 18). Se administraron distintas tareas, antes y después de finalizado el periodo de instrucción, para evaluar los efectos de la instrucción sobre la descodificación, comprensión lectora, conciencia fonológica, y procesamiento ortográfico. Los niños con DAL que participaron en la instrucción basada en el reconocimiento de fonemas y en la instrucción basada en reconocimiento de sílabas mejoraron la descodificación en comparación al grupo control. Además, los niños con DAL que participaron en las condiciones de fonema, sílaba y principio-rima solicitaron un mayor número de ayudas durante el periodo de instrucción en aquellas condiciones donde la demanda de procesamiento fonológico era mayor (v. gr., palabras de baja frecuencia y palabras largas). Sin embargo, se registraron tiempos de lectura mayores, durante el periodo de instrucción, para las palabras largas en la condición de entrenamiento basada en fonemas. Estos hallazgos sugieren que el entrenamiento en procesos fonológicos mejora la descodificación de las palabras en niños con DAL en una ortografía transparente.

Keywords

computer-assisted readingdyslexiareading disabilitiesspeech feedbackremedial readinginstrucción asistida a través de ordenadordislexiadificultades de aprendizaje de la lecturaayuda correctivareeducación
Type
Articles
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , May 2007 , pp. 52 - 67
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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

Álvarez, C.J., de Vega, M., & Carreiras, M. (1998). La sílaba como unidad de activación léxica en la lectura de palabras trisílabas. Psicothema, 10, 371–386.Google Scholar
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, 29–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowey, J.A., & Francis, J. (1991). Phonological analysis as a function of age and exposure to reading instruction. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12, 91–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carreiras, M., Álvarez, C., & de Vega, M. (1993). Syllable frequency and visual word recognition in Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 766–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattell, R.B., & Cattell, A.K.S. (1950/1960). Culture fair intelligence test, scale 1. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing. (Spanish translation: Cordero, De la Cruz, & Seisdedos, Tests de Factor “g”. Escala 1. Madrid: T.E.A., Ediciones, 1989).Google Scholar
Cuetos, F., Rodríguez, B., & Ruano, E, (1996). Batería de evaluación de los procesos lectores de los niños de Educación Primaria (PROLEC). Madrid, Spain: T.E.A., Ediciones.Google Scholar
Daneman, M.M., & Carpenter, P.A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Defior, S., Justicia, F., & Martos, F. (1996). The influence of lexical and sublexical variables in normal and poor Spanish readers. Reading and Writing: An interdisciplinary Journal, 8, 487–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domínguez, A., & Cuetos, F. (1992). Desarrollo de las habilidades de reconocimiento de palabras en niños con distinta competencia lectora. Cognitiva, 2, 193–208.Google Scholar
Domínguez, A., Cuetos, F., & de Vega, M. (1993). Efectos diferenciales de la frecuencia silábica posicional: dependencia del tipo de prueba y características de los estímulos. Estudios de Psicología, 50, 5–31.Google Scholar
García-Albea, J., Sánchez, R., & del Viso, S. (1982). Efectos de la frecuencia de uso en el reconocimiento de palabras. Investigación Psicológica, 1, 24–63.Google Scholar
Jiménez, J.E. (1997). A reading-level design study of phonemic processes underlying reading disabilities in a transparent orthography. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiménez, J.E., Álvarez, C., Estévez, A., & Hernández-Valle, I. (2000). Onset-rime units in visual word recognition in Spanish normal readers and children with reading disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 135–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiménez, J.E., García, E., Ortiz, M.R., Hernández-Valle, I., Guzmán, R., Rodrigo, M., Estévez, A., Díaz, A., & Hernández, S. (2005). Is the deficit in phonological awareness better explained in terms of task differences or effects of syllable structure? Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 267–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiménez, J.E., & Guzmán, R. (2003). The influence of code-oriented versus meaning-oriented approaches to reading instruction on word recognition in the Spanish language. International Journal of Psychology, 38, 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiménez, J.E., & Haro, C. (1995). Effects of word linguistic properties on phonological awareness in Spanish children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiménez, J.E., & Hernández-Valle, I. (2000). Word identification and reading disorders in the Spanish language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 267–275.Google Scholar
Jiménez, J. E., & Ramírez, G. (2002). Identifying subtypes of reading disabilities in the Spanish language. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 5, 3–19.Google Scholar
Jiménez, J.E., & Rodrigo, M. (1994). Is it true that the differences in reading performance between students with and without LD cannot be explained by IQ? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 155–163.Google Scholar
Jones, K.M., Torgesen, J.K., & Sexton, M.A. (1987). Using computer guided practice to increase decoding fluency in learning disabled children: A study using the Hint and Hunt Program. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 122–128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Juilland, A., & Chang-Rodríguez, E. (1964). Frequency dictionary of Spanish words. Holland: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. (1984). Using eye fixation to study reading conmprehension. In Kieras, D.E. & Just, M.A. (Eds.), New methods in reading comprehension research (pp. 151–182). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Liberman, I.Y., Liberman, A.M., Mattingly, I.G., & Shankweiler, D. (1980). Orthography and the beginning reader. In Kavanagh, J. & Venezky, R. (Eds.), Orthograhpy, reading and dyslexia (pp. 137–153). Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Lovett, M.W., Barron, R.W., Forbes, J.E., Cuksts, B., & Steinbach, K.A. (1994). Computer speech-based training of literacy skills in neurologically impaired children: A controlled evaluation. Brain and Language, 47, 117–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lundberg, I. (1995). The computer as a tool of remediation in the education of students with reading disabilities: A theory-based approach. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olofsson, A. (1992). Synthetic speech and computer aided reading for reading disabled children. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, R. K., Foltz, G., & Wise, B. (1986). Reading instruction and remediation with the aid of computer speech. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 18, 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, R.K., Kliegl, R., Davidson, B.J., & Foltz, G. (1985). Individual and developmental differences in reading disability. In MacKinnon, G.E. & Waller, T.G. (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice, (Vol. 4, pp. 1–64). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Olson, R. K., & Wise, B. (1992). Reading on the computer with orthographic and speech feedback: An overview of the Colorado remediation project. Reading & Writing: An interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 107–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, R.K., Wise, B., Conners, F., Rack, J., & Fulker, D. (1989). Specific deficits in component reading and language skills: Genetic and environmental influences. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 339–348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perfetti, C.A. (1985). Reading ability. New York. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rack, J.P., Snowling, M.J., & Olson, R.K. (1992). The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: A review. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigo, M., & Jiménez, J.E. (1999). An analysis of the word naming errors of normal readers and reading disabled children in Spanish. Journal of Research in Reading, 22, 180–197.Google Scholar
Rodrigo, M., Jiménez, J.E., García, E., Díaz, A., Ortiz, M.R., Guzmán, R., Hernández-Valle, I., Estévez, A., & Hernández, S. (2004). Assessment of orthographical processing in Spanish children with dyslexia: The role of lexical and sublexical units. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 2, 105–126.Google Scholar
Schreuder, R., & van Bon, W. (1989). Phonemic analysis: Effects of word properties. Journal of Research in Reading, 12, 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, L.S. (1992). An evaluation of the discrepancy definition of dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 618–629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siegel, L.S., & Ryan, E.B. (1988). Development of grammatical-sensitivity, phonological, and short term memory skills in normally achieving and subtypes of learning disabled children. Developmental Psychology, 24, 28–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, L.S., & Ryan, E.B.(1989). The development of working memory in normally achieving and subtypes of learning disabled children. Child Development, 60, 973–980.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanovich, K.E. (1988). Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and garden variety poor reader: The phonological-core variance-difference model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 590–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K.E., & Siegel, L.S. (1994). Phenotypic performance profile of children with reading disabilities: A regression-based test of the phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 24–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanson, H.L. (1999). Reading research for students with LD: A meta-analysis of intervention outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 504–532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torgesen, J.K., Alexander, A.W., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Voeller, K., Conway, T., & Rose, E. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torgesen, J.K., & Barker, T.A. (1995). Computers as aids in the prevention and remediation of reading disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 76–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treiman, R. (1992). The role of intrasyllabic units in learning to read and spell. In Gough, P.B., Ehri, L., & Treiman, R. (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 65–106). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Treiman, R., & Weatherston, S. (1992). Effects of linguistic structure on children's ability to isolate initial consonants. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 174–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valle-Arroyo, F. (1989). Errores de lectura y escritura. Un modelo dual. Cognitiva, 2, 35–63.Google Scholar
Van Daal, V.H.P., & Reitsma, P. (1993). The use of speech feedback by normal and disabled readers in computer-based reading practice. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5, 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Bos, K.P., & Spelberg, H.C.L. (1994). Word identification routes and reading disorders. In den Bos, K.P. Van, Siegel, L.S., Bakker, D.J., & Share, D.L. (Eds.), Current directions in dyslexia research (pp. 201–219). Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Van den Bosch, A., Content, A., Daelemans, W., & de Gelder, B. (1994). Measuring the complexity of writing systems. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 1, 178–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Leij, A., (1994). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on word and pseudoword reading of reading-disabled student. In Bos, K.P. Van den, Siegel, L.S., Bakker, D.J., & Share, D.L. (Eds.), Current directions in dyslexia research (pp. 251–267). Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Wagner, R.K., & Torgesen, J.K., (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wise, B., Olson, R., Anstett, M., Andrews, L., Terjak, M., Schneider, V., & Kostuch, J. (1989). Implementing a longterm computerized remedial reading program with synthetic speech feedback: Hardware, software, and real-world issues. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 21, 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wise, B.W., Ring, J., & Olson, R. (1999). Training phonological awareness with and without explicit attention to articulation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 271–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed