Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 31, Issue 6, pp 1255–1271 | Cite as

Visual–motor symbol production facilitates letter recognition in young children

  • Deborah Zemlock
  • Sophia Vinci-Booher
  • Karin H. James
Article
First Online:
  • 352 Downloads

Abstract

Previous research has suggested that handwriting letters may be an important exerciser to facilitate early letter understanding. Experimental studies to date, however, have not investigated whether this effect is general to any visual–motor experience or specific to handwriting letters. In the present work, we addressed this issue by testing letter knowledge using three measures in preschool children before and after a school-based intervention. Participants were divided into four training groups (letter-writing, digit-writing, letter-viewing, digit-viewing) that either wrote letters or digits or viewed letters or digits, twice a week for 6 weeks. We hypothesized that the visual–motor experience of handwriting letters or digits would improve letter knowledge more than viewing experience and that this effect would not be specific to training with letters. Our results demonstrated that the writing groups improved in letter recognition—one component of letter knowledge—significantly more than the viewing groups. The letter-writing group did not improve significantly more than the digit-writing group. These results suggest that visual–motor practice with any symbol could lead to increases in letter recognition. We interpret this novel finding as suggesting that any handwriting will increase letter recognition in part because it facilitates gains in visual–motor coordination.

Keywords

Handwriting Preschool Education Letters Invervention 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Adi-Japha, E., & Freeman, N. H. (2001). Development of differentiation between writing and drawing systems. Developmental Psychology, 37(1), 101–114.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.37.1.101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aram, D. (2006). Early literacy interventions: The relative roles of storybook reading, alphabetic activities, and their combination. Reading and Writing, 19, 489–515.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-006-9005-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aram, D., & Biron, S. (2004). Joint storybook reading and joint writing interventions among low SES preschoolers: Differential contributions to early literacy. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 588–610.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2004.10.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Abbott, S. P., Graham, S., & Richards, T. (2002). Writing and reading: Connections between language by hand and language by eye. Journal of learning disabilities, 35(1), 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonoti, F., Vlachos, F., & Metallidou, P. (2005). Writing and drawing performance of school age children: Is there any relationship? School Psychology International, 26, 243–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hall, A. H., Toland, M. D., Grisham-Brown, J., & Graham, S. (2014). Exploring interactive writing as an effective practice for increasing Head Start students’ alphabet knowledge skills. Early Childhood Education Journal, 42(6), 423–430.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-013-0594-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Iverson, J. M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2005). Gesture paves the way for language development. Psychological Science, 16, 367–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. James, K. H. (2010). Sensori-motor experience leads to changes in visual processing in the developing brain. Developmental Science, 13(2), 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. James, K. H., & Engelhardt, L. (2012). The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development in pre-literate children. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 1(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Johnson, T. R. (2016). Violation of the homogeneity of regression slopes assumption in ANCOVA for two-groups pre-post design. Tutorial on a modified Johnson–Neyman procedure. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 12(3), 253–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kersey, A. J., & James, K. H. (2013). Brain activation patterns resulting from learning letter forms through active self-production and passive observation in young children. Frontiers in Psychology.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00567.Google Scholar
  12. Li, J. & James, K. H. (2016). Symbol learning is facilitated by the visual variability produced by handwriting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.Google Scholar
  13. Longcamp, M., Zerbato-Poudou, M., & Velay, J. (2005). The influence of writing practice on letter recognition in preschool children: A comparison between handwriting and typing. Acta Psychologica, 119(1), 67–79.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.10.019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lonigan, C. J., Farver, J. M., Phillips, B. M., & Clancy-Menchetti, J. (2011). Promoting the development of preschool children’s emergent literacy skills: A randomized evaluation of a literacy-focused curriculum and two professional development models. Reading and Writing, 24, 305–337.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9214-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Miller, K., Kelly, M., & Zhou, X. (2005). Learning mathematics in China and the United States. In J. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 163–178). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  16. Molfese, V., Beswick, J., Molnar, A., & Jacobi-Vessels, J. (2006). Alphabetic skills in preschool: A preliminary study of letter naming and letter writing. Special Issue: Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 5–19.Google Scholar
  17. National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Developing early literacy: A scientific synthesis of early literacy development and implications for intervention. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.Google Scholar
  18. Neumann, M. M., Hood, M., & Ford, R. M. (2013). Using environmental print to enhance emergent literacy and print motivation. Reading and Writing, 26(5), 771–793.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9390-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pelatti, C. Y., Piasta, S. B., Justice, L. M., & O’Connell, A. (2014). Language-and literacy-learning opportunities in early childhood classrooms: Children’s typical experiences and within-classroom variability. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29(4), 445–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rice, D., Connor, C., & Thomas, A. (2006). Observation of science instruction in first, second and third grade: Time and trade-off. Paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  21. Scanlon, D. M., & Vellutino, F. R. (1996). Prerequisite skills, early instruction, and success in first grade reading: Selected results from a longitudinal study. Mental Retardation and Development Disabilities, 2, 54–63.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2779(1996)2:1<54:AID-MRDD9>3.0.CO;2-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
  23. Vinci-Booher, S., James, T. W., & James, K. H. (2016). Visual–motor functional connectivity in preschool children emerges after handwriting experience. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 5(3), 107–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychological and Brain SciencesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options