Literature DB >> 15168898

Do current connectionist learning models account for reading development in different languages?

Florian Hutzler1, Johannes C Ziegler, Conrad Perry, Heinz Wimmer, Marco Zorzi.   

Abstract

Learning to read a relatively irregular orthography, such as English, is harder and takes longer than learning to read a relatively regular orthography, such as German. At the end of grade 1, the difference in reading performance on a simple set of words and nonwords is quite dramatic. Whereas children using regular orthographies are already close to ceiling, English children read only about 40% of the words and nonwords correctly. It takes almost 4 years for English children to come close to the reading level of their German peers. In the present study, we investigated to what extent recent connectionist learning models are capable of simulating this cross-language learning rate effect as measured by nonword decoding accuracy. We implemented German and English versions of two major connectionist reading models, Plaut et al.'s (Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., & Patterson, K. (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological Review, 103, 56-115) parallel distributed model and Zorzi et al.'s (Zorzi, M., Houghton, G., & Butterworth, B. (1998a). Two routes or one in reading aloud? A connectionist dual-process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1131-1161); two-layer associative network. While both models predicted an overall advantage for the more regular orthography (i.e. German over English), they failed to predict that the difference between children learning to read regular versus irregular orthographies is larger earlier on. Further investigations showed that the two-layer network could be brought to simulate the cross-language learning rate effect when cross-language differences in teaching methods (phonics versus whole-word approach) were taken into account. The present work thus shows that in order to adequately capture the pattern of reading acquisition displayed by children, current connectionist models must not only be sensitive to the statistical structure of spelling-to-sound relations but also to the way reading is taught in different countries.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15168898     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.09.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  6 in total

Review 1.  Getting to the bottom of orthographic depth.

Authors:  Xenia Schmalz; Eva Marinus; Max Coltheart; Anne Castles
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-12

2.  Discovering and accounting for limitations in applications of theories of word reading acquisition.

Authors:  G Brian Thompson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-06-13

3.  Lexical is as lexical does: computational approaches to lexical representation.

Authors:  Anna M Woollams
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 2.331

4.  CDP++.Italian: modelling sublexical and supralexical inconsistency in a shallow orthography.

Authors:  Conrad Perry; Johannes C Ziegler; Marco Zorzi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Modelling reading development through phonological decoding and self-teaching: implications for dyslexia.

Authors:  Johannes C Ziegler; Conrad Perry; Marco Zorzi
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  Learning to read as the formation of a dynamic system: evidence for dynamic stability in phonological recoding.

Authors:  Claire M Fletcher-Flinn
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-07-03
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.