Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42538157›Full record

ArticleDyslexia (Chichester, England)2026

A Developmental Study of Lexico-Phonological Distance in Vocabulary Learning: Evidence From Typically Developing and Learning-Disabled Arabic-Speaking Children.

Abeer Asli-Badarneh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dyslexia (Chichester, England), 2026. 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

1 author.

Abeer Asli-BadarnehDepartment of Early Childhood, Special Education and Learning Disabilities, The Arab Academic College for Education, Haifa, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2575-4939

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study examines the role of lexico-phonological distance in shaping vocabulary acquisition within Arabic diglossia, drawing on 299 Arabic-speaking children with and without learning disabilities across Grades 1-6. Performance followed a consistent gradient: identical words were easiest; unique words hardest; cognates fell between. This hierarchy held across both receptive and expressive tasks and remained stable over development; the Grade × Word Type interaction was non-significant, indicating that distance-related constraints remain stable with schooling. More telling was the Group × Word Type interaction: the performance gap between typically developing (TD) and learning-disabled (LD) children widened disproportionately for unique words, where the demands of representational construction meet reduced phonological processing resources. A modality asymmetry further qualified the picture: expressive vocabulary proved more sensitive to diglossic distance than receptive vocabulary, consistent with the heavier retrieval demands production places on underspecified representations. Theoretically, the findings are interpreted within MAWRID, which treats linguistic distance as a constraint on representational quality and the Lexical Quality Hypothesis, which links representational precision to lexical access efficiency. These findings implicate lexico-phonological distance as a structural, developmentally persistent constraint on lexical acquisition in Arabic diglossia, with disproportionate consequences for children with compromised phonological resources.

Indexed as

Language DevelopmentLearning DisabilitiesPhoneticsVerbal LearningVocabularyArabsChildFemaleHumansMaleArabicdiglossiaexpressive vocabularylearning disabled (LD)lexico‐phonological distancereceptive vocabularytypically developing (TD)

Identifiers

PMID42538157
PMCPMC13427639

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.