Abstract
Morpho-orthographic segmentation, rapid parsing of complex written words into their morphological components, is a potential source of difference in word recognition between struggling and typical readers. Although typical readers use morpho-semantic representations and morpho-orthographic segmentation in processing morphologically complex words, struggling readers typically rely on morpho-semantic processes involving coarse-grained processing of whole-word units rather than morpho-orthographic segmentation involving fine-grained letter processing. We tested this limitation in struggling readers, examining reading-ability differences among chronological-age, reading-age, and adult groups in morpho-orthographic segmentation in a primed lexical decision task. We transposed letter order across the morphological boundary of complex-word primes, focusing on disruption in priming effects of morphological and pseudo-orthographic primes that involved only orthographic overlap with target words. Morpho-semantic (coarse-grained) processing in Grade 2 typical readers was indicated by no moderation of priming effects by suffix types and letter transposition. By Grade 6, evidence of emerging fine grained analysis was found in both groups, with clear evidence of both coarse and fine grained analysis in adults. Grade 6 struggling readers showed comparable patterns of coarse and fine grained analysis as Grade 6 typical readers. Although they experienced generalized priming effects, struggling readers did experience response time disruption with transposed primes, indicating that they, like Grade 6 typical readers, adopt fine-grained processing perhaps as a precursor of emerging morpho-orthographic segmentation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Apel, K., Diehm, E., & Apel, L. (2013). Using multiple measures of morphological awareness to assess its relation to reading. Topics in Language Disorders, 133, 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.Ob013e318280f576
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge University Press.
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R Package Version 1, pp. 1–5. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
Bell, B., Morgan, G. B., Schoeneberger, J. a, Loudermilk, B. L., Kromrey, J. D., & Ferron, J. M. (2010). Dancing the sample-size limbo with mixed models: How low can you go? SAS Global Forum 2010, 1–11. Retrieved from https://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings10/197-2010.pdf
Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Nagy, W., & Carlisle, J. (2010). Growth in phonological, orthographic, and morphological awareness in grades 1 to 6. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39, 141-163. 1007/sl0936-009-9130-6
Beyersmann, E., Casalis, S., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J. (2015). Language proficiency and morpho-orthographic segmentation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1054–1061. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0752-9
Beyersmann, E., Castles, A., & Coltheart, M. (2012). Morphological processing during visual word recognition in developing readers: Evidence from masked priming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 1306–1326. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.656661
Beyersmann, E., Cavalli, E., Casalis, S., & Colé, P. (2016). Embedded stem priming effects in prefixed and suffixed pseudowords. Scientific Studies of Reading, 20(3), 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2016.1140769
Beyersmann, E., Mccormick, S., & Rastle, K. (2013). Letter transpositions within morphemes and across morpheme boundaries. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 2389–2410. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.782326
Bowers, P. N., Kirby, J. R., & Deacon, H. S. (2010). The effects of morphological instruction on literacy skills: A systematic review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 80, 144–179. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309359353
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
Carlisle, J. F. (2010). Effects of instruction in morphological awareness on literacy achievement: An integrative review. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 464–487. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.45.4.5
Deacon, S. H., Benere, J., & Pasquarella, A. (2013). Reciprocal relationship: Children's morphological awareness and their reading accuracy across grades 2 to 3. Developmental Psychology, 49(6), 1113–1126. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029474
Deacon, S. H., & Francis, K. A. (2017). How children become sensitive to the morphological structure of the words that they read. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1469. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01469
Diependaele, K. Morris, J, Serota, R. M., Bertrand, D., & Grainger, J. (2013). Breaking boundaries: Letter transpositions and morphological processing. Journal of Language and Cognitive Processes, 287, 988–1003. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2012.719082
Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2009). Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: The case of prefixed words. Memory & Cognition, 37, 895–908. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.6.895
Dunabeitia, J. A., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2014). Revisiting letter transpositions within and across morphemic boundaries. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 21(6), 1557–1575. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0609-2
Dunn, L.M., & Dunn, D.M. (2007). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition. Pearson Education
Gilbert, J. K., Goodwin, A. P., Compton, D. L., & Kearns, D. M. (2014). Multisyllabic word reading as a moderator of morphological awareness and reading comprehension. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413509966
Grainger, J., Léte, B., Bertand, D., Dufau, S., & Ziegler, J. C. (2012). Evidence for multiple routes in learning to read. Cognition, 123, 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.01.003
Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). A dual route approach to orthographic processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(54), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00054
Hendrix, P., & Sun, C. C. (2021). A word or two about nonwords: Frequency, semantic neighborhood density, and orthography-to-semantics consistency effects for nonwords in the lexical decision task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(1), 157–183. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000819
Heyer, V., & Kornishova, D. (2018). Semantic transparency affects morphological priming … eventually. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (hove), 71(5), 1112–1124. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1310915
Jared, D., Jouravlev, O., & Joanisse, M. F. (2017). The effect of semantic transparency on the processing of morphologically derived words: Evidence from decision latencies and event-related potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 43(3), 422–450. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000316
Joanisse, M. F., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1999). Impairments in verb morphology after brain injury: A connectionist model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96, 7592–7597. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.13.7592
Kruk, R. S., & Bergman, K. (2013). The reciprocal relations between morphological processes and reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114(1), 10–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.09.014
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2014). lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package). R Package Version 2, 0–6. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmerTest
Law, J. M., Veispak, A., Vanderauwera, J., & Ghesquiere, P. (2018). Morphological awareness and visual processing of derivational morphology in high-functioning adults with dyslexia: An avenue to compensation? Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(3), 483–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716417000467
Lazaro, M., Illera, V., & Sainz, J. (2015). The suffix priming effect: Further evidence for an early morpho-orthographic segmentation process independent of its semantic content. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1031146
Lupker, S. J., & Pexman, P. M. (2010). Making things difficult in lexical decision: The impact of pseudohomophones and transposed-letter nonwords on frequency and semantic priming effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(5), 1267–1289. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020125
Manitoba Education and Training (2019). English language arts curriculum framework. A living document. Author. Retrieved from https://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/ela/framework/index.html
Medeiros, J., & Dunabeitia, J. A. (2016). Not everybody sees the ness in the darkness: Individual differences in masked suffix priming. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1585. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01585
Quémart, P., & Casalis, S. (2015). Visual processing of derivational morphology in children with developmental dyslexia: Insights from masked priming. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 345–376. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271641300026X
Quémart, P., Casalis, S., & Cole, P. (2011). The role of form and meaning in the processing of written morphology: A priming study in French developing readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109(4), 478–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.02.008
Quémart, P., Gonnerman, L. M., Downing, J., & Deacon, S. H. (2018). The development of morphological representations in young readers: A cross-modal priming study. Developmental Science, 21(4), e12607. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12607
R Core Team. (2016). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/
Rastle, K. (2019). The place of morphology in learning to read in English. Cortex, 116, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2018.02.008
Rastle, K., & Davis, M. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 942–971. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802069730
Schunck, R. (2016). Cluster size and aggregated Level 2 variables in multilevel models. A cautionary note. Methods, 10(101), 97–108. https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2016.005
Spencer, M., Muse, A., Wagner, E. K., Petscher, Y., Schatschneider, C., Tighe, E. L., & Bishop, M. D. (2015). Examining the underlying dimensions of morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge. Reading and Writing, 28, 959–988.
Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2012). Test of word reading efficiency- Second Edition (TOWRE 2). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed
Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K., Rashotte, C.A., & Pearson, N.A. (2013). CTOPP-2: Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing-Second Edition. Pro-Ed
Wechsler, D. (2011). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence – Second Edition. Pearson Education
Yap, M. J., Sibley, D. E., Balota, D. A., Ratcliff, R., & Rueckl, J. (2015). Responding to nonwords in the lexical decision task: Insights from the English Lexicon Project. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 41(3), 597–613. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000064
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rosenberg, L., Kruk, R.S. Coarse or fine? Grain size and morpho-orthographic segmentation in struggling readers. Ann. of Dyslexia 72, 28–55 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-021-00240-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-021-00240-2