Past-Tense Morphology and Phonological Deficits in Children With Dyslexia and Children With Language Impairment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors investigated past-tense morphology problems in children with dyslexia compared to those classically observed in children with oral language impairment (LI). Children were tested on a past-tense elicitation task involving regulars (look-looked), irregulars (take-took), and nonwords (murn-murned). Phonological skills were also assessed, using tests of nonsense word reading and phoneme elision. Analyses focused on whether children with dyslexia and LI showed overlapping patterns of morphological and phonological difficulties compared to controls with typical reading and language levels. Both the groups with LI and dyslexia had difficulty generating past tenses overall, although the deficit was less pronounced in dyslexia. Both groups also showed similar problems with phonological processing. The results have important implications for the theory that both language and reading problems involve oral language processing deficits. Specifically, our data support the theory that the phonological deficits observed in both dyslexia and LI are related to deficits in morphological processing. However, some important differences between dyslexia and LI are also discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it