External Generallzability of Inquiry Involving Artificial Orthography

Bibliographic Data

ID8221803
AuthorsJune D Knafle (Northeastern Illinois University, corresponding author), Alice Legenza (University of Kansas)
Year1978
Volume15
Issue2
Pages331-347
Publication date1978-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Educational Research Journal (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0002-8312 • E-ISSN: 1935-1011
PublisherAmerican Educational Research Association (AERA) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.3102/00028312015002331
OpenAlexW2015091962
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited16

Four experiments were conducted to examine the validity of artificial orthography as a research device. Although widely cited studies have used several artificial orthographies to investigate basic reading processes, this study seems to indicate that artificial orthographies are not comparable to each other or to the English alphabet. Two experiments used paired associate tasks with kindergarten, first-grade, and college students; one experiment used a transfer task with first-grade students; one experiment used a visual discrimination task with kindergarten students. Varying results were obtained with the orthographies as a function of (a) the type of task the student was required to perform, (b) the age of the student, (c) the size of the stimuli, and (d) the number of response distractors presented. The results indicate that the use of artificial orthography is not valid when findings are generalized from artificial orthographies to the English alphabet and from various aged individuals to the way young children learn actual letters and words in English

Alphabet · Linguistics · Mathematics education · Natural language processing · Orthography · Reading (process · Spelling · Task (project management · Artificial Intelligence · Child Development and Digital Technology · Computer Science · Psychology · Reading and Literacy Development · Writing and Handwriting Education

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub