The relation between reading ability and morphological skills: Evidence from derivational suffixes

By M. Singson, D. Mahony, V. Mann. 2000

447 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/697f655008f2d4a37ea0ec70b263d827d274dcda

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. E. Geva
2. C. McBride-Chang
3. Xi Chen
4. Michael J. Kieffer
5. Kenn Apel
6. S. H. Deacon
7. Gloria Ramirez
8. Y. Luo

In Education

1. E. Geva
2. Kenn Apel
3. Xi Chen
4. Michael J. Kieffer
5. S. H. Deacon
6. C. McBride-Chang
7. Y. Luo
8. Peter N. Bowers

Citations in the corpus

• Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle-school students. (2006, methodology): “…words has been found to be correlated with their vocabulary knowledge (Carlisle & Fleming, 2003; Nagy, Berninger, Abbott, Vaughan, & Vermeulen, 2003; Singson et al., 2000) and reading comprehension (Brittain, William Nagy, School of Education, Seattle Pacific University; Virginia W. Berninger and…”
• Influence of the visual attention span on child reading performance: A cross-sectional study (2009, background): “Indeed, in accordance with previous reports (Casalis & Louis-Alexandre, 2000; De Jong & Van Der Leij, 2003; Kirby et al., 2003; Singson et al., 2000; Wagner et al., 1997), the amount of variance in reading attributable to phonological skills was found to decrease significantly after the first grade.”
• Morphological awareness in Spanish-speaking English language learners: within and cross-language effects on word reading (2010, methodology): “Children in this age range, rather than beginning readers, were selected because previous research suggests that the contribution of morphological awareness increases with reading experience (Carlisle, 1995; Singson et al., 2000).”
• Morphological awareness: Just “more phonological”? The roles of morphological and phonological awareness in reading development (2004, background): “Further, Carlisle (1995) indicated that this contribution might be greatest to reading comprehension, and Singson et al. (2000) argued that the role of morphological awareness might increase over development.”
• Morphological Awareness Skills of English Language Learners and Children With Dyslexia (2008, methodology): “In this study, sensitivity to derivational suffixes (e.g., ness to signify a noun, ize to signify a verb, ive to signify an adjective) was measured with a task developed by Singson et al. (2000) in which the child had to identify the correct morphological ending of an item.”
• MORPHOLOGY MATTERS IN LEARNING TO READ: A COMMENTARY (2003, background): “001) for third through sixth graders (Singson et al., 2000).”
• A Synthesis of Morphology Interventions and Effects on Reading Outcomes for Students in Grades K–12 (2008, background): “Results rather consistently demonstrate that morphological awareness accounts for around 4 percent or 5 percent of the variance in decoding (Deacon & Kirby, 2004; Mahony, Singson, & Mann, 2000).”
• Morphological Awareness and Learning to Read: A Cross-Language Perspective (2006, methodology): “Furthermore, studies employing regression analysis have found that the contribution of morphological awareness usually drops substantially once phonological awareness is considered (e.g., Carlisle & Nomanbhoy, 1993; Mahony et al., 2000; Singson et al., 2000).”