| Literature DB >> 33262732 |
Cristina Ferraz Borges Murphy1, Eliane Schochat2, Doris-Eva Bamiou1,3,4.
Abstract
Despite considerable evidence regarding the influence of orthography on reading processing, the impact of orthographic depth on reading predictors remains unclear. In addition, it also remains unknown the role of the orthography in the influence of auditory temporal processing and attention skills on word reading skills. The current study investigates the word reading predictors in a group of British and Brazilian children with typical development considering phonological, auditory sensory, short-term memory, and sustained attention skills. Rhyme and Alliteration skills predicted word reading in both groups; however, the correlation in the British group was more robust. Short-term memory was also correlated with reading in both groups; however, it was a significant word reading predictor only in the British group. The auditory sensory was not directly correlated with word reading in either group; however, it was involved with Rhyme and Alliteration performance only in the British group. Those results were discussed considering the complexity of the phonological structure and opaque orthography in English when compared to Portuguese, which indicates that the less transparent the orthography, the higher the importance of factors such as phonological awareness, short-term memory, and to some extent, auditory sensory processing skills on word reading acquisition. Those results emphasize the need to consider orthography and phonological features of a particular language when developing a reading assessment and treatments.Entities:
Keywords: attention; auditory processing; cross-linguistic; memory; phonological awareness; reading
Year: 2020 PMID: 33262732 PMCID: PMC7688452 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.582572
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Characteristics of the participants.
| British group ( | Brazilian group (n = 58) | |
| Girls | 47.6% | 36.2% |
| Boys | 52.3% | 63.7% |
| 7.68 ± 1.59 | 7.27 ± 0.77 | |
| 14.4 | 15.1 | |
| Normal | Normal |
Performance of both groups in each of the tests applied.
| British group ( | Brazilian group ( | |||
| Mean ± | Median | Mean ± | Median | |
| HIT (%) | 90.7 ± 6 | 93.6 | 68.1 ± 15 | 71.0 |
| Reaction time (ms) | 1074 ± 79 | 1028.5 | 834 ± 75 | 832.0 |
| 3.95 ± 0.8 | ||||
| Digit span | 4.14 ± 1 | 5.0 | 69.33 ± 27 | 4.0 |
| Rhyme and alliteration (%) | 67.90 ± 28 | 80.9 | 69.33 ± 27 | 75.0 |
| Phoneme task (%) | 68.53 ± 30 | 80.0 | 24.29 ± 31 | 6.25 |
| Single words (%) | 53.5 ± 23 | 64.0 | 58.5 ± 36 | 73.0 |
| Time compressed speech (%) | 83.6 ± 11 | 88.0 | 68 ± 6.3 | 70.0 |
Correlations between main measures for the British group.
| No. | Measure | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| Reading | − | ||||||
| Rhyme and alliteration | 0.687** | − | |||||
| Spoonerism | 0.489* | 0.437* | − | ||||
| Attention HIT | 0.360 | 0.304 | 0.426* | − | |||
| Attention reaction time | –0.340 | –0.400 | –0.152 | −0.428* | − | ||
| Digit span | 0.540** | 0.531** | 0.191 | 0.282 | –0.202 | − | |
| Time compressed speech | 0.241 | 0.410* | 0.121 | 0.016 | –0.285 | 0.318 |
Correlations between main measures for the Brazilian group.
| No. | Measure | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| Reading | − | ||||||
| Rhyme and alliteration | 0.455** | − | |||||
| Phoneme manipulation | 0.433** | 0.647** | − | ||||
| Attention HIT | 0.193 | 0.435** | 0.245 | − | |||
| Attention reaction time | 0.139 | –0.033 | 0.014 | –0.170 | − | ||
| Digit span | 0.435** | 0.341* | 0.398** | –0.138 | 0.119 | − | |
| Time compressed speech | 0.079 | 0.164 | 0.050 | 0.218 | –0.059 | 0.115 |
Four model for prediction of reading in both groups.
| British group | Brazilian group | |||||
| Independent variables | β | β | ||||
| Age | 7.98 | 1.56 | 0.67** | 26.54 | 5.09 | 0.57** |
| 0.43** | 0.315** | |||||
| Age | 5.33 | 1.30 | 0.45** | 19.91 | 4.92 | 0.42** |
| Rhyme and alliteration | 0.36 | 0.07 | 0.53** | 4.04 | 2.31 | 0.23* |
| Phoneme | 0.01 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 1.68 | 1.03 | 0.22 |
| 0.67** | 0.451** | |||||
| Δ | 0.24** | 0.153** | ||||
| Age | 3.57 | 1.51 | 0.30* | 16.84 | 5.49 | 0.36** |
| Rhyme and alliteration | 0.24 | 0.08 | 0.36** | 3.14 | 2.45 | 0.18 |
| Phoneme | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 1.22 | 1.05 | 0.16 |
| Digit span | 5.69 | 2.03 | 0.39* | 9.08 | 5.22 | 0.20 |
| Attention HIT | –0.50 | 0.50 | –0.14 | 0.21 | 0.29 | 0.08 |
| Attention RT | –0.02 | 0.03 | –0.10 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.11 |
| 0.723** | 0.467** | |||||
| Δ | 0.07* | 0.04 | ||||
| Age | 3.37 | 1.54 | 0.28* | 16.49 | 5.54 | 0.35** |
| Rhyme and alliteration | .23 | 0.08 | 0.35* | 3.25 | 2.47 | 0.18* |
| Phoneme | 0.01 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 1.13 | 1.06 | 0.15 |
| Digit span | 5.18 | 2.12 | 0.35* | 9.73 | 5.32 | 0.22 |
| Attention HIT | –0.41 | 0.51 | –0.11 | 0.26 | 0.30 | 0.11 |
| Attention RT | –0.22 | 0.03 | –0.91 | 0.26 | 0.30 | 0.11 |
| Time compressed speech | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.09 | –0.42 | 0.58 | –0.74 |
| 0.721** | 0.462** | |||||
| Δ | –0.007 | –0.005 | ||||
Three models for prediction of rhyme and alliteration in both groups.
| British group | Brazilian group | |||||
| Independent variables | β | β | ||||
| Age | 7.08 | 2.87 | 0.40* | 0.66 | 0.34 | 0.25* |
| 0.13* | 0.06* | |||||
| Age | –0.91 | 3.42 | –0.05 | –0.25 | 0.35 | –0.09 |
| Digit span | 13.15 | 3.85 | 0.60** | 0.97 | 0.30 | 0.39** |
| Attention HIT | 0.51 | 1.11 | 0.098 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.45** |
| Attention RT | –0.03 | 0.08 | –0.097 | –0.00 | 0.00 | –0.02 |
| 0.36** | 0.28** | |||||
| ΔR2 | 0.27** | 0.27** | ||||
| Age | –1.21 | 3.49 | –0.07 | –0.25 | 0.36 | –0.09 |
| Digit span | 12.21 | 4.21 | 0.56** | 0.97 | 0.31 | 0.38** |
| Attention HIT | 0.62 | 1.14 | 0.12 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.45** |
| Attention RT | –0.03 | 0.08 | –0.08 | –0.00 | 0.00 | –0.01 |
| Time compressed speech | 0.20 | 0.33 | 0.10 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.00 |
| 0.34** | 0.27** | |||||
| Δ | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||