The effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learning
Distributing study opportunities over time typically improves the retention of verbal material compared to consecutive study trials, yet little is known about the influence of temporal spacing on orthographic form learning specifically. This experiment sought to obtain and compare estimates of the m...
| Những tác giả chính: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Định dạng: | Journal article |
| Ngôn ngữ: | English |
| Được phát hành: |
Wiley
2022
|
| _version_ | 1826310558935154688 |
|---|---|
| author | Wegener, S Wang, H-C Beyersmann, E Reichle, ED Nation, K Castles, A |
| author_facet | Wegener, S Wang, H-C Beyersmann, E Reichle, ED Nation, K Castles, A |
| author_sort | Wegener, S |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Distributing study opportunities over time typically improves the retention of verbal material compared to consecutive study trials, yet little is known about the influence of temporal spacing on orthographic form learning specifically. This experiment sought to obtain and compare estimates of the magnitude of the spacing effect on written word form learning across three different outcome measures, administered between participants. Skilled adult readers (<i>N</i> = 120) read aloud 16 sentences containing an embedded pseudoword a total of four times. Half of the items were temporally distributed (appearing once in each of four blocks), while half were massed (read on four consecutive trials within a block). After a short delay, learning was assessed using tests of recognition (orthographic choice) or recall (spelling to dictation or letter cue spelling). There was a significant effect of spacing across all outcome measures (all <i>p</i> < .001). When the magnitude of the spacing effect was compared across these three measures, letter cue spelling showed a significantly larger spacing effect than spelling to dictation (<i>p</i> = .039) while orthographic choice did not significantly differ from either (both <i>p</i> > .05). These findings indicate that temporal spacing influences the learning of orthographic form, regardless of the outcome measure used. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T07:53:44Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:eb8a45c5-65c0-4dc2-a61b-0c9dc61fca2f |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T07:53:44Z |
| publishDate | 2022 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:eb8a45c5-65c0-4dc2-a61b-0c9dc61fca2f2023-08-03T10:54:04ZThe effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learningJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:eb8a45c5-65c0-4dc2-a61b-0c9dc61fca2fEnglishSymplectic ElementsWiley2022Wegener, SWang, H-CBeyersmann, EReichle, EDNation, KCastles, ADistributing study opportunities over time typically improves the retention of verbal material compared to consecutive study trials, yet little is known about the influence of temporal spacing on orthographic form learning specifically. This experiment sought to obtain and compare estimates of the magnitude of the spacing effect on written word form learning across three different outcome measures, administered between participants. Skilled adult readers (<i>N</i> = 120) read aloud 16 sentences containing an embedded pseudoword a total of four times. Half of the items were temporally distributed (appearing once in each of four blocks), while half were massed (read on four consecutive trials within a block). After a short delay, learning was assessed using tests of recognition (orthographic choice) or recall (spelling to dictation or letter cue spelling). There was a significant effect of spacing across all outcome measures (all <i>p</i> < .001). When the magnitude of the spacing effect was compared across these three measures, letter cue spelling showed a significantly larger spacing effect than spelling to dictation (<i>p</i> = .039) while orthographic choice did not significantly differ from either (both <i>p</i> > .05). These findings indicate that temporal spacing influences the learning of orthographic form, regardless of the outcome measure used. |
| spellingShingle | Wegener, S Wang, H-C Beyersmann, E Reichle, ED Nation, K Castles, A The effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learning |
| title | The effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learning |
| title_full | The effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learning |
| title_fullStr | The effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learning |
| title_full_unstemmed | The effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learning |
| title_short | The effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learning |
| title_sort | effect of spacing versus massing on orthographic learning |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT wegeners theeffectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT wanghc theeffectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT beyersmanne theeffectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT reichleed theeffectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT nationk theeffectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT castlesa theeffectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT wegeners effectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT wanghc effectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT beyersmanne effectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT reichleed effectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT nationk effectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning AT castlesa effectofspacingversusmassingonorthographiclearning |