Explaining phonology and reading in adult learners: Introducing prosodic awareness and executive functions to reading ability
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background This study was designed to extend our understanding of phonology and reading to include suprasegmental awareness using measures of prosodic awareness, which are complex tasks that tap into the rhythmic aspects of phonology. By requiring participants to access, reflect on and manipulate word stress, the prosodic awareness measures used here necessarily impose demands on the executive system. Prosodic awareness was evaluated as a phonological predictor of reading in older readers while controlling for executive functions (EF) in order to ascertain whether observed predictive relationships could be confidently attributed to suprasegmental awareness. Methods 103 adults between 18 and 55 years of age completed tasks on prosodic awareness, EF, vocabulary, nonverbal abilities, naming speed and short‐term memory. Results Independent contributions of prosodic awareness added to models of word reading, whereas EF processes did not uniquely contribute to adult reading outcomes. Conclusions Suprasegmental phonology explains individual differences in word reading among experienced readers. Theoretical implications of findings are discussed. Implications for Practice What is already known about this topic Phonological awareness (PA) becomes less predictive of reading in older readers. PA is typically assessed at the level of the segment (e.g., phonemes, syllables and onset‐rimes), with less focus on suprasegmental processes (e.g., rhythm, stress and intonation). Suprasegmental phonological processing includes measures of prosodic ability (e.g., awareness and manipulation of suprasegmental features of oral language). Studies on prosodic awareness and reading have independent contributions beyond segmental PA in early readers. Less work has been investigated among adult readers. Executive functions (EF) including inhibitory control, working memory, switching and updating and monitoring of goal directed behaviour, predict overall academic achievement. Limited studies have controlled for EF demands in phonological tasks. What this paper adds Tasks of prosodic awareness necessarily impose demands on the executive system when manipulating components of oral language. After controlling for EF and controls, prosodic awareness explained individual differences in adult word reading. Tasks of suprasegmental phonological processes explain the association between phonology and reading in older and more experienced readers. Researchers who explore phonology and reading development should begin to include tasks of prosodic awareness to examine the dual role of segmental and suprasegmental PA as it is implicated across development. Implications for theory, policy or practice Theoretical models of phonology and reading can be extended to include suprasegmental processes. For educational practitioners involved in reading assessment of older readers, tasks of prosodic awareness are a more age‐appropriate measure of phonology. Tasks of phonology and reading with increasing complexity impose greater demands on the executive system. The relationship between cognitive flexibility and reading needs to be considered in theoretical models of reading.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle