Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34003369›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2022

Biliteracy and acquisition of novel written words: the impact of phonological conflict between L1 and L2 scripts.

Beatriz Bermúdez-Margaretto, Grigory Kopytin, Andriy Myachykov, Yang Fu, Mikhail Pokhoday, Yury Shtyrov

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Beatriz Bermúdez-MargarettoCentre for Cognition and Decision Making, Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, HSE University, Moscow, Russian Federation. bermudezmargaretto@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3687-3634
Grigory KopytinCentre for Cognition and Decision Making, Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, HSE University, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Andriy MyachykovCentre for Cognition and Decision Making, Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, HSE University, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Yang FuUniversity of La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain.
Mikhail PokhodayCentre for Cognition and Decision Making, Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, HSE University, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Yury ShtyrovCentre for Cognition and Decision Making, Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, HSE University, Moscow, Russian Federation.

Funding

Russian Science Foundation 19-78-00140
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The acquisition of new orthographic representations is a rapid and accurate process in proficient monolingual readers. The present study used biliterate and bialphabetic population to address the impact of phonological inconsistencies across the native (L1) and second (L2) alphabets. Naming latencies were collected from 50 Russian-English biliterates through a reading-aloud task with familiar and novel word forms repeated across 10 blocks. There were three Script conditions: (1) native Cyrillic, (2) non-native Roman, and (3) Ambiguous (with graphically identical, but phonologically inconsistent graphemes shared by both alphabets). Our analysis revealed the main effect of Script on both reading and orthographic learning: naming latencies during training were longer for the ambiguous stimuli, particularly for the novel ones. Nonetheless, novel word forms in the ambiguous condition approached the latencies for the familiar words along the exposures, although this effect was faster in the phonologically consistent trials. Post-training tests revealed similarly successful performance patterns for previously familiar and newly trained forms, indicating successful rapid acquisition of the latter. Furthermore, we found the highest free recall rates for the ambiguous stimuli. Overall, our results indicate that phonological inconsistency initially interferes with the efficiency of novel word encoding. Nevertheless, it does not prevent efficient attribution of orthographic representations; instead, the knowledge of two distinct alphabets supports a more efficient learning and a better memory for ambiguous stimuli via enhancing their encoding and retrieval.

Indexed as

PhoneticsReadingHumansLearningWriting

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.