How Robust is the Contribution of Morphological Awareness to General Spelling Outcomes?

118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Metalinguistic contributions to reading and spelling in second and third grade students (2012, background): “Morphological awareness explains unique variance on measures of reading on its own (e.g., 41‐55%; Carlisle, 2000) and contributes roughly 5% additional variance beyond other factors, such as phonemic awareness (Deacon & Kirby, 2004; Deacon, Kirby, & Casselman-Bell, 2009) and short-term memory ( Deac”
Using Multiple Measures of Morphological Awareness to Assess its Relation to Reading (2013, methodology): “We chose not to include tasks representing these factors because previous studies have shown that morphological awareness abilities uniquely predict reading above these other skills (e.g., Apel et al., 2012; Deacon & Kirby, 2004; Deacon et al., 2009).”