Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rngvg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T06:14:31.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward understanding the problem in severely disabled readers Part II: Consonant errors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Janet F. Werker ,
Susan E. Bryson  and
Karen Wassenberg
Janet F. Werker*
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
Susan E. Bryson
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University
Karen Wassenberg
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University
*
Janet F. Werker, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1Y7, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present research was designed to systematically examine consonant errors made by severely disabled readers in an attempt to clarify the nature of their underlying disability. In our first study, three groups of disabled readers were compared to both age- and reading-level matched controls on their performance reading a list of 96 one-syllable nonsense words. As predicted, subjects in all five groups made many more phonetic feature substitutions than orientation reversal substitutions. This is consistent with previous work indicating that reading errors typically result from linguistic- rather than visual-processing difficulties. Further, subjects from all three reading disabled groups, but not from the control groups, made more consonant addition errors than any other error type. A qualitative, post-hoc analysis of the errors suggested that these additions were quite systematic for the reading disabled subjects. The second study was designed as a replication and extension of the first. Results were consistent with those obtained in Study 1. These results are discussed with reference to the possible underlying cause(s) of severe reading disability.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 1989 , pp. 13 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Backman, J., Bruck, M., Herbert, M., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1984). Acquisition and use of spelling-sound correspondences in reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 39, 114–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baddock, D., & Lovegrove, W. (1981). The effects of contrast, stimulus duration, and spatial frequency on visible persistence in normal and disabled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 7, 495–505.Google Scholar
Bakker, D. J. (1967). Temporal order perception and reading retardation. In Bakker, D. J. & Satz, P. (Eds.), Specific reading disability: Advances in theory and method. Rotterdam: Rotterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Bryson, S. E., & Werker, J. F. (1989). Toward understanding the problem in severely disabled children, Part I: Vowel errors. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conrad, R. (1972). Speech and reading. In Kavanagh, J. F. & Mattingly, I. G. (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye: The relationship between speech and reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, G. (1970). Relative frequency of English spellings. New York: Teacher's College Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, C. A., Liberman, I. Y., & Shankweiler, D. (1977). On interpreting the error pattern of the beginning reader. Language and Speech, 20, 162–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frederiksen, J. (1981). Sources of process interactions in reading. In Lesgold, A. & Perfetti, C. (Eds.), Interactive processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fromkin, V. (1973). Speech errors as linguistic evidence. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Liberman, I. Y. (1983). A language-oriented view of reading and its disabilities. In Myklebust, H. (Ed.), Progress in learning disabilities: Vol. 5. New York: Grune & Stratton.Google Scholar
Liberman, I. Y., Shankweiler, D., Orlando, C., Harris, K. S., & Bell-Berti, F. B. (1971). Letter confusion and reversals of sequence in the beginning reader: Implications for Orton's theory of developmental dyslexia. Cortex, 7, 127–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Locke, J. L. (1983). Phonological acquisition and change. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Mark, L. S., Shankweiler, D., & Liberman, I. Y. (1977). Phonetic receding and reading difficulty in beginning readers. Memory and Cognition, 5, 623–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattingly, I. G. (1972). Reading, the linguistic process, and linguistic awareness. In Kavanagh, J. F. & Mattingly, I. G. (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Morrison, F., & Manis, F. (1981). Cognitive processes and reading disability: A critique and proposal. In Brainerd, C. (Ed.), Progress in cognitive development. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Orton, S. T. (1926). “Word blindness” in school children. Archives of Neurophysiology and Psychiatry, 14, 581–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orton, S. T. (1937). Reading, writing, and speech problems in children. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Perfetli, C. A., & Hogaboam, T. (1975). Relalionship between single word decoding and reading comprehension skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 461–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, C. (1971). Pre-school children's knowledge of English phonology. Harvard Educational Review, 41, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, C. (1986). Children's creative spelling. London: Roulledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Seidenberg, M. S., Bruck, M., Fornarolo, G., & Backman, J. (1985). Word recognition processes of poor and disabled readers: Do they necessarily differ? Applied Psycholinguistics, 6, 161–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shankweiler, D., & Grain, S. (1986). Language mechanisms and reading disorder: A modular approach. Cognition, 24, 139–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shankweiler, D., & Liberman, I. Y. (1972). Misreading: A search for causes. In Kavanagh, J. F. & Maltingly, I. (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye: The relationship between speech and reading (pp. 293–317). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Siegel, L. S., & Ryan, E. B. (1984). Reading disability as a language disorder. Remedial and Special Education, 5, 28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snowling, M. J. (1980). The development of grapheme-phoneme correspondence in normal and dyslexic readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 29, 294–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Snowling, M. J. (1983). The comparison of acquired and developmental disorders of reading – A discussion. Cognition, 14, 105–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, H. G., Satz, P., & Friel, J. (1979). Developmental dyslexia in relation to other childhood reading disorders: Significance and clinical utility. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 84–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vellutino, F. R. (1979). Dyslexia: Theory and research. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vellutino, F. R. (1987). Dyslexia. Scientific American, 256, 34–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vellutino, F. R., Steger, J., & Kandel, G. (1972). Reading disability: An investigation of the perceptual deficit hypothesis. Cortex, 8, 106–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Venezky, R. L. (1967). English orthography: Its graphical structure and its relation to sound. Reading Research Quarterly, 2, 75–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wassenberg, K. M., Bryson, S. E., & Werker, J. F. (1985, 06). Consonant substitution errors in reading disabled and normal children: Phonetic, visual, and frequency effects. Paper presented at the meeting of Canadian Psychological Association, Halifax, Nova Scotia.Google Scholar
Wassenberg, K. M., Bryson, S. E., & Werker, J. F. (In preparation). Toward understanding the problem in severely disabled readers, Part III: Consonant substitution errors.Google Scholar
Winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design. San Francisco: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar