ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
The Impact of Different Writing Systems on Children's Spelling Error Profiles: Alphabetic, Akshara, and Hanzi Cases.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Virtual Reality-Based Rehabilitation Therapy on Reducing the Degree of Pain Experienced by Individuals with Low Back Pain.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- Developmental Trajectories of Transcription and Oral Language Skills in Kindergarten Students: The Influence of Executive Functions and Home Literacy Practices.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- Analysis of spelling errors from the 'dyslexic sight words' list.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The importance of literacy in academics and the predominantly digital world cannot be understated. The literacy component of writing is less researched than that of reading, even though it holds equal significance for modern success. Spelling is an important aspect of the construct of literacy, and is more difficult to acquire than reading. Previous work on spelling error analysis for English provides insight into the sets of knowledge and cognitive processes required for children to perform the task, and their different strategies across development. However, different sets of skills and strategies may contribute to spelling across types of orthographies. In this study, we extend spelling error analysis to groups of biliterate children learning two scripts, which include English plus either: (a) another Latin-script alphabet with a shallow orthography (Malay); (b) a transparent alphasyllabary using akshara (Tamil); or (c) a non-alphabetic, morphosyllabic script using simplified hanzi characters (Mandarin Chinese). These sets of scripts vary in how speech is mapped to print. We utilized an error coding scheme based on triple-code theory to enumerate the occurrence of phonological, orthographic (graphemic), and morphological (semantic) types of spelling errors across the three language groups. Five hundred and sixty-eight Grade 1, 6-year-old children participated, with 128 English + Malay, 119 English + Tamil, and 321 English + Chinese children in each bilingual group. They completed a spelling to dictation task in their Asian language, with ten words taken from the grade level curriculum per language. Results indicate group differences in the proportions of error types, with more overall errors for Tamil, more phonological errors for Malay, and more irrelevant or non-sense words for Chinese. The implications are that different scripts present different challenges for young learners.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.