ArticleScientific reports2023
The influence of oral vocabulary knowledge on individual differences in a computational model of reading.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Simulating the spectrum, not the syndrome: Large scale individualized modeling of oral reading in stroke aphasia.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Modelling individual differences in reading using an optimised MikeNet simulator: the impact of reading instruction.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies have demonstrated systematic individual differences in the degree of semantic reliance (SR) when reading aloud exception words in adult skilled readers. However, the origins of individual differences in reading remain unclear. Using a connectionist model of reading, this study investigated whether oral vocabulary knowledge may affect the degree of SR as a potential source of individual differences in reading. Variety in oral vocabulary knowledge was simulated by training the model to learn the mappings between spoken and meaning word forms with different vocabulary sizes and quantities of exposure to these vocabularies. The model's SR in the reading aloud task was computed. The result demonstrated that the model with varying amounts of oral exposure and vocabulary sizes had different levels of SR. Critically, SR was able to predict the performance of the model on reading aloud and nonword reading, which assimilated behavioural reading patterns. Further analysis revealed that SR was largely associated with the interaction between oral vocabulary exposure and oral vocabulary size. When the amount of exposure was limited, SR significantly increased with vocabulary sizes but decreased then with vocabulary sizes. Overall, the simulation results provide the first computational evidence of the direct link between oral vocabulary knowledge and the degree of SR as a source of individual differences in reading.
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.