Attention Components and Spelling Accuracy: Which Connections Matter?
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Attention and Working Memory
1.2. The Development of Spelling Competence and the Relation with Attention, Working Memory
1.3. The Development of Spelling Competence in a Transparent Language System
1.4. This study
Aim and Hypothesis
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Procedures
2.3. Selected Tasks
2.3.1. General Cognitive Functioning Task
2.3.2. Writing Tasks
Writing Accuracy
2.3.3. Handwriting Speed
2.3.4. Attention tasks
Planning Subtests
Attention Subtests
2.3.5. Visuo-Spatial Working Memory Tasks
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
3.2. Regression Analysis
4. Discussion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Research Design
References
- Turker, S.; Preisler, A.; Reiterer, S.; Schneider, P. Cognitive and Behavioural Weaknesses in Children with Reading Disorder and AD(H)D. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Muris, P. Relation of attention control and school performance in normal children. Percept. Mot. Ski. 2006, 102, 78–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Checa, P.; Rueda, M.R. Behavioral and brain measures of executive attention and school competence in late childhood. Dev. Neuropsychol. 2011, 36, 1018–1032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Posner, M.I.; Rothbart, M.K. Attention to learning of school subjects. Trends Neurosci. Educ. 2014, 3, 14–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Wetzel, N. Development of control of attention from different perspectives. Front. Psychol. 2014, 5, 1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Suades-González, E.; Forns, J.; García-Esteban, R.; López-Vicente, M.; Esnaola, M.; Álvarez-Pedrerol, M.; Julvez, J.; Cáceres, A.; Basagaña, X.; López-Sala, A.; et al. A Longitudinal Study on Attention Development in Primary School Children with and without Teacher-Reported Symptoms of ADHD. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Best, J.R.; Miller, P.H. Developmental perspective on executive function. Child Dev. 2010, 81, 1641–1660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jaekel, J.; Wolke, D.; Bartman, P. Poor attention rather than hyperactivity/impulsivity predicts academic achievement in very preterm and full-term adolescents. Psychol. Med. 2013, 43, 183–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Apel, K. A comprehensive definition of morphological awareness: Implications for assessment. Top. Lang. Disord. 2014, 34, 197–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berninger, V.; Rijlaarsdam, G.; Fayol, M. Mapping research questions about translation to methods, measures, and models. In Translation of Thought to Written Text While Composing: Advancing Theory, Knowledge, Methods, and Applications; Fayol, M., Alamargot, D., Berninger, V., Eds.; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 27–67. [Google Scholar]
- Connelly, V.; Hurst, G. The influence of handwriting fluency on writing quality in later primary and early secondary education. Handwrit. Today 2001, 2, 5–57. [Google Scholar]
- Re, A.M.; Mirandola, C.; Esposito, S.S.; Capodieci, A. Spelling errors among children with ADHD symptoms: The role of working memory. Res. Dev. Disabil. 2014, 35, 2199–2204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DuPaul, G.J.; Gormley, M.J.; Laracy, S.D. Comorbidity of LD and ADHD: Implications of DSM-5 for assessment and treatment. J. Learn. Disabil. 2013, 46, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Castro, E.; Cotov, M.; Brovedani, P.; Coppola, G.; Meoni, T.; Papini, M.; Terlizzi, T.; Vernucci, C.; Pecini, C.; Muratori, P. Associations between Learning and Behavioral Difficulties in Second-Grade Children. Children 2020, 7, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zoccolotti, P.; De Luca, M.; Marinelli, C.V.; Spinelli, D. Predicting individual differences in reading, spelling and maths in a sample of typically developing children: A study in the perspective of comorbidity. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0231937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mirsky, A.F.; Anthony, B.J.; Duncan, C.C.; Ahearn, M.B.; Kellam, S.G. Analysis of the elements of attention: A neuropsychological approach. Neuropsychol. Rev. 1991, 2, 109–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Posner, M.; Fan, J. Attention as an organ system. In Topics in Integrative Neuroscience: From Cells to Cognition; Pomerantz, J., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 31–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naglieri, J.A. How valid is the PASS theory and CAS? Sch. Psychol. Rev. 1999, 28, 145–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naglieri, J.A.; Das, J.P. Cognitive Assessment System: Interpretive Handbook; Riverside Publishing: Itasca, IL, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Naglieri, J.A.; Das, J.P. Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, Successive (PASS) theory: A revision of the concept of intelligence. In Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues; Flanagan, D.P., Harrison, P.L., Eds.; Guilford: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 120–135. [Google Scholar]
- Miyake, A.; Friedman, N.P.; Emerson, M.J.; Witzki, A.H.; Howerter, A.; Wager, T.D. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex frontal lobe tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cogn. Psychol. 2000, 41, 49–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kane, M.J.; Engle, R.W. The role of prefrontal cortex in working memory capacity, executive attention, and general fluid intelligence: An individual-differences perspective. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2002, 9, 637–671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eriksson, J.; Vogel, E.K.; Lansner, A.; Bergström, F.; Nyberg, L. Neurocognitive architecture of working memory. Neuron 2015, 88, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kent, S.; Wanzek, J.; Petscher, Y.; Al Otaiba, S.; Kim, Y.-S. Writing fluency and quality in kindergarten and first grade: The role of attention, reading, transcription, and oral language. Read. Writ. Interdiscip. J. 2014, 27, 1163–1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Drijbooms, E.; Groen, M.A.; Verhoeven, L. How executive functions predict development in syntactic complexity of narrative writing in the upper elementary grades. Read. Writ. 2017, 30, 209–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vanderberg, R.; Swanson, H.L. Which components of working memory are important in the writing process? Read. Writ. 2007, 20, 721–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kellogg, R.T.; Olive, T.; Piolat, A. Verbal, visual, and spatial working memory in written language production. Acta Psychol. 2007, 124, 382–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casas, A.M.; Ferrer, M.S.; Fortea, I.B. Written composition performance of students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Appl. Psycholinguist. 2013, 34, 443–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Re, A.M.; Pedron, M.; Cornoldi, C. Expressive writing difficulties in children described as exhibiting ADHD symptoms. J. Learn. Disabil. 2007, 40, 244–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Resta, S.P.; Eliot, J. Written expression in boys with attention deficit disorder. Percept. Mot. Ski. 1994, 79, 1131–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campbell, S.B.; Von Stauffenberg, C. Delay and inhibition as early predictors of ADHD symptoms in third grade. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2009, 37, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cornoldi, C.; Del Prete, F.; Gallani, A.; Sella, F.; Re, A.M. Components affecting expressive writing in typical and disabled children. Adv. Learn. Behav. Disabil. 2010, 23, 269–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graham, S.; Fishman, E.J.; Reid, R.; Hebert, M. Writing characteristics of students with attention deficit hyperactive disorder: A meta-analysis. Learn. Disabil. Res. Pract. 2016, 31, 75–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berninger, V.W.; Richards, T.L. Brain Literacy for Educators and Psychologists; Elsevier Science: San Diego, CA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Pinto, G.; Bigozzi, L.; Tarchi, C.; Gamannossi, B.A.; Canneti, L. Cross-lag analysis of longitudinal associations between primary school students’ writing and reading skills. Read. Writ. 2015, 28, 1233–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coltheart, M. Modeling reading: The dual-route approach. Sci. Read. A Handb. 2005, 6, 23. [Google Scholar]
- Rapcsak, S.Z.; Henry, M.L.; Teague, S.L.; Carnahan, S.D.; Beeson, P.M. Do dual-route models accurately predict reading and spelling performance in individuals with acquired alexia and agraphia? Neuropsychologia 2007, 45, 2519–2524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hepner, C.; McCloskey, M.; Rapp, B. Do reading and spelling share orthographic representations? Evidence from developmental dysgraphia. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2017, 34, 119–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sartori, G. La Lettura; Il Mulino: Bologna, Italy, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Coltheart, M.; Curtis, B.; Atkins, P.; Haller, M. Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed processing approaches. Psychol. Rev. 1993, 100, 589–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coltheart, M.; Rastle, K.; Perry, C.; Langdon, R.; Ziegler, J. DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychol. Rev. 2001, 108, 204–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheriston, L.; Critten, S.; Jones, E. Routes to Reading and Spelling: Testing the Predictions of Dual-Route Theory. Read. Res. Q. 2016, 51, 403–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Patterson, K.E. Lexical but nonsemantic spelling. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 1986, 3, 341–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hillis, A.E.; Caramazza, A. Mechanisms for accessing lexical representations for output: Evidence from a category-specific semantic deficit. Brain Lang. 1991, 40, 106–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kreiner, D.S. Reaction time measures of spelling: Testing a two-strategy model of skilled spelling. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 1992, 8, 765–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barry, C. Spelling routes (or roots or routes). In Handbook of Spelling: Theory, Process and Intervention; Brown, G.D.A., Ellis, N.C., Eds.; John Wiley: Chichester, UK, 1994; pp. 27–49. [Google Scholar]
- Perry, C.; Ziegler, J.C.; Coltheart, M. A dissociation between orthographic awareness and spelling production. Appl. Psycholinguist. 2002, 23, 43–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Papadopoulos, T.C.; Spanoudis, G.C.; Chatzoudi, D. A longitudinal investigation of the double dissociation between reading and spelling deficits: The role of linguistic and executive function skills. Read. Writ. 2020, 33, 1075–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berninger, V.; Abbott, R.; Cook, C.R.; Nagy, W. Relationships of Attention and Executive Functions to Oral Language, Reading, and Writing Skills and Systems in Middle Childhood and Early Adolescence. J. Learn. Disabil. 2017, 50, 434–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsai, L.H.; Meng, L.F.; Hung, L.Y.; Chen, H.Y.; Lu, C.P. Coincidence of homophone spelling errors and attention problems in school children: A survey study. Res. Dev. Disabil. 2011, 32, 75–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buchwald, A.; Rapp, B. Distinctions between orthographic long-term memory and working memory. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2009, 26, 724–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cloutman, L.; Gingis, L.; Newhart, M.; Davis, C.; Heidler-Gary, J.; Crinion, J.; Hillis, A.E. A neural network critical for spelling. Ann. Neurol. Off. J. Am. Neurol. Assoc. Child Neurol. Soc. 2009, 66, 249–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Orsolini, M.; Fanari, R.; Tosi, V.; De Nigris, B.; Carrier, R. From phonological recoding to lexical reading: A longitudinal study on reading development in Italian. Lang. Cogn. Process. 2006, 21, 576–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jongejan, W.; Verhoeven, L.; Siegel, L.S. Predictors of reading and spelling abilities in first-and second-language learners. J. Educ. Psychol. 2007, 99, 835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bourke, L.; Adams, A.-M. Cognitive constraints and the early learning goals in writing. J. Res. Read. 2010, 33, 94–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bourke, L.; Davies, S.J.; Sumner, E.; Green, C. Individual differences in the development of early writing skills: Testing the unique contribution of visuo-spatial working memory. Read. Writ. 2014, 27, 315–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, K.K.; Abrams, L.; Zoller, S.M.; Gibson, S.M. Why did I right that? Factors that influence the production of homophone substitution errors. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 2008, 61, 977–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spataro, P.; Cestari, V.; Rossi-Arnaud, C. The relationship between divided attention and implicit memory: A meta-analysis. Acta Psychol. 2011, 136, 329–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez, C.; Torrance, M.; Betts, L.; Cerezo, R.; García, T. Effects of ADHD on writing composition product and process in school-age students. J. Atten. Disord. 2020, 24, 1735–1745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rosenblum, S.; Weiss, P.L.; Parush, S. Product and process evaluation of handwriting difficulties. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2003, 15, 41–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Racine, M.B.; Majnemer, A.; Shevell, M.; Snider, L. Handwriting performance in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). J. Child Neurol. 2008, 23, 399–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Baddeley, A.D.; Hitch, G.I. Working Memory; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Landerl, K.; Wimmer, H. Development of word reading fluency and spelling in a consistent orthography: An 8-year follow-up. J. Educ. Psychol. 2008, 100, 150–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marinelli, C.V.; Romani, C.; Burani, C.; Zoccolotti, P. Spelling acquisition in English and Italian: A cross-linguistic study. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 1843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, Y.S.; Petscher, Y.; Foorman, B.R.; Zhou, C. The contributions of phonological awareness and letter-name knowledge to letter-sound acquisition—a cross-classified multilevel model approach. J. Educ. Psychol. 2010, 102, 313–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Angelelli, P.; Judica, A.; Spinelli, D.; Zoccolotti, P.; Luzzatti, C. Characteristics of writing disorders in Italian dyslexic children. Cog. Behav. Neurol. 2004, 17, 18–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angelelli, P.; Notarnicola, A.; Judica, A.; Zoccolotti, P.; Luzzatti, C. Spelling impairments in Italian dyslexic children: Phenomenological changes in primary school. Cortex 2010, 46, 1299–1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Notarnicola, A.; Angelelli, P.; Judica, A.; Zoccolotti, P. Development of spelling skills in a shallow orthography: The case of Italian language. Read. Writ. 2012, 25, 1171–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daigle, D.; Costerg, A.; Plisson, A.; Ruberto, N.; Varin, J. Spelling errors in French-speaking children with dyslexia: Phonology may not provide the best evidence. Dyslexia 2016, 22, 137–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bigozzi, L.; Tarchi, C.; Pezzica, S.; Pinto, G. Evaluating the predictive impact of an emergent literacy model on dyslexia in Italian children: A four-year prospective cohort study. J. Learn. Disabil. 2016, 49, 51–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cossu, G.; Gugliotta, M.; Marshall, J.C. Acquisition of reading and written spelling in a transparent orthography: Two non parallel processes? Read. Writ. 1995, 7, 9–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barry, C.; De Bastiani, P. Lexical priming of nonword spelling in the regular orthography of Italian. In Spelling; Treiman, R., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bigozzi, L.; Tarchi, C.; Pinto, G. Consistency and stability of Italian children’s spelling in dictation versus composition assessments. Read. Writ. Q. 2017, 33, 109–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinto, G.; Bigozzi, L.; Gamannossi, B.A.; Vezzani, C. Emergent literacy and early writing skills. J. Genet. Psychol. 2012, 173, 330–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, Y.S.G. Interactive Dynamic Literacy Model: An Integrative Theoretical Framework for Reading-Writing Relations. In Reading-Writing Connections; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 11–34. [Google Scholar]
- Angelelli, P.; Notarnicola, A.; Costabile, D.; Marinelli, C.V.; Judica, A.; Zoccolotti, P.; Luzzatti, C. Test DDO: Diagnosi dei disturbi ortografici in età evolutive. In DDO Test: Diagnosis of Spelling Disorders in Developmental Age; Erickson: Trento, Italy, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Bozzo, M.T.; Pesenti, E.; Siri, S.; Usai, M.C.; Zanobini, M. TeST CeO, Classificazione degli errori ortografici. In TeST CeO Classification of Orthographic Errors; Centro Studi Erickson: Trento, Italy, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Tressoldi, P.E.; Cornoldi, C.; Re, A.M. Batteria per la valutazione della scrittura e della competenza ortografica nella scuola dell’obbligo. In BVSCO, Battery for the Assessment of Writing Skills of Children from 7 to 13 Years Old; Giunti OS: Firenze, Italy, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Altemeier, L.; Jones, J.; Abbott, R.D.; Berninger, V.W. Executive Functions in Becoming Writing Readers and Reading Writers: Note Taking and Report Writing in Third and Fifth Graders. Dev. Neuropsychol. 2008, 29, 161–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caravolas, M. Spelling development in alphabetic writing systems: A cross-linguistic perspective. Eur. Psychol. 2004, 9, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wechsler, D. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth Edition (WISC-IV); The Psychological Corporation: San Antonio, TX, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Orsini, A.; Picone, L. WISC-III Contributo alla taratura italiana. In Contribution to the Italian Validation; O.S. Organizzazioni Speciali: Milano, Italy, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Sattler, J.M.; Dumont, R. Assessment of Children: WISC-IV and WPPSI-III Supplement; Author: San Diego, CA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Taddei, S.; Naglieri, J.A. L’Adattamento italiano del Das Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System. In The Italian Adaptation of the Das-Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System; Naglieri, J.A., Das, J.P., Eds.; Cognitive Assessment System–Manuale: Firenze, Italy, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Naglieri, J. Current advances in assessment and intervention for children with learning disabilities. Adv. Learn. Behav. Disabil. 2003, 16, 163–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naglieri, J.A.; Rojahn, J. Construct Validity of the PASS Theory and CAS: Correlations with Achievement. J. Educ. Psychol. 2004, 96, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Naglieri, J.A.; Pickering, E.B. Helping Children Learn: Intervention Handouts for Use in School and at Home; Paul H Brookes Publishing: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Stroop, J.R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J. Exp. Psychol. 1935, 18, 643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mammarella, I.C.; Toso, C.; Pazzaglia, F.; Cornoldi, C. BVS-Corsi: Batteria per la valutazione della memoria visiva e spaziale. In BVS-Corsi: A Test Battery for Assessing Visual and Spatial Memory; Erickson: Trento, Italy, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Fox, J. Applied Regression Analysis and Generalized Linear Models; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Austin, P.C.; Steyerberg, E.W. The number of subjects per variable required in linear regression analyses. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2015, 68, 627–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Field, A. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Feder, K.P.; Majnemer, A. Handwriting development, competency, and intervention. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 2007, 49, 312–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pureza, J.R.; Gonçalves, H.A.; Branco, L.; Grassi-Oliveira, R.; Fonseca, R.P. Executive functions in late childhood: Age differences among groups. Psychol. Neurosci. 2013, 6, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Caramazza, A.; Miceli, G.; Villa, G.; Romani, C. The role of the graphemic buffer in spelling: Evidence from a case of acquired dysgraphia. Cognition 1987, 26, 59–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cresswell, A. Self-monitoring in student writing: Developing learner responsibility. ELT J. 2000, 54, 235–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellis, R.; Yuan, F. The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Stud. Second Lang. Acquis. 2004, 26, 59–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayes, J.R.; Berninger, V. Cognitive processes in writing: A framework. In Writing Development and Instruction in Children with Hearing, Speech, and Language Disorders; Arfé, B., Dockrell, J., Berninger, V., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 3–15. [Google Scholar]
- Cowan, N. Working memory maturation: Can we get at the essence of cognitive growth? Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2016, 11, 239–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tracy, B.; Reid, R.; Graham, S. Teaching young students strategies for planning and drafting stories: The impact of self-regulated strategy development. J. Educ. Res. 2009, 102, 323–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yao, Y.; Cui, R.; Li, Y.; Zeng, L.; Jiang, J.; Qiu, N.; Xie, J.; Jiang, D.; Ying, S.; Tang, X.; et al. Action Real-Time Strategy Gaming Experience Related to Enhanced Capacity of Visual Working Memory. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2020, 14, 333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benzing, V.; Schmidt, M.; Jäger, K.; Egger, F.; Conzelmann, A.; Roebers, C.M. A classroom intervention to improve executive functions in late primary school children: Too ‘old’for improvements? Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2019, 89, 225–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amso, D.; Scerif, G. The attentive brain: Insights from developmental cognitive neuroscience. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2015, 16, 606–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Laurìa, A.; Secchi, S.; Vessella, L. Acoustic Comfort as a Salutogenic Resource in Learning Environments—A Proposal for the Design of a System to Improve the Acoustic Quality of Classrooms. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dockrell, J.; Shield, B. Acoustical barriers in classrooms: The impact of noise on performance in the classroom. Br. Educ. Res. J. 2006, 32, 509–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Time 1 (2nd grade N = 59) | Time 1 (3rd grade N = 53) | |||||||||||
Min | Max | M | SD | Skewness | Kurtosis | Min | Max | M | SD | Skewness | Kurtosis | |
Non-homophone errors (*) | 0 | 21 | 5.8 | 4.80 | 1.03 | 0.48 | 0 | 31 | 10.34 | 7.35 | 0.88 | 0.15 |
Homophone errors (*) | 0 | 7 | 1.59 | 1.51 | 1.12 | 1.32 | 0 | 6 | 1.24 | 1.50 | 1.34 | 1.29 |
Handwriting Speed | 18 | 78 | 53.36 | 11.76 | −0.17 | 0.18 | 44 | 94 | 68.61 | 10.96 | 0.45 | 0.54 |
Attention | ||||||||||||
Matching numbers | 4 | 19 | 10.86 | 2.80 | 0.08 | 0.13 | 5 | 17 | 10.57 | 2.32 | 0.21 | 0.48 |
Planned codes | 3 | 15 | 10.01 | 2.55 | −0.71 | 0.35 | 1 | 18 | 10.1 | 3.23 | 0.12 | −0.12 |
Expressive attention | 1 | 13 | 7.65 | 2.95 | 0.14 | −0.71 | 4 | 18 | 9.45 | 3.61 | 0.56 | −0.51 |
Number detection (**) | 2 | 19 | 11.97 | 3.41 | −0.35 | 0.64 | 3 | 16 | 11.41 | 2.66 | −0.81 | 1.35 |
Receptive attention | 3 | 19 | 11.13 | 3.32 | 0.12 | −0.26 | 4 | 16 | 10.4 | 2.42 | −0.17 | −0.13 |
Working Memory | ||||||||||||
Paths | 0 | 29 | 10.16 | 6.17 | 0.73 | 0.50 | 2 | 29 | 13.28 | 6.94 | 0.48 | 0.06 |
Corsi’s backward span | 2 | 6 | 3.86 | 0.90 | 0.28 | −0.47 | 2 | 7 | 4.52 | 1.33 | 0.11 | 0.15 |
Time 2 (3rd grade N = 59) | Time 2 (4th grade N = 34) | |||||||||||
Writing | ||||||||||||
Non-homophone errors (*) | 0 | 33 | 7.66 | 8.35 | 1.43 | 1.44 | 0 | 19 | 3.83 | 3.97 | 1.75 | 3.75 |
Homophone errors (*) | 0 | 10 | 2.39 | 2.88 | 1.50 | 1.17 | 0 | 6 | 0.5 | 1.25 | 3.13 | 10.27 |
Handwriting Speed | ||||||||||||
Matching numbers | 6 | 15 | 10.32 | 2.13 | 0.04 | −0.48 | 6 | 14 | 10.31 | 2.17 | −0.28 | −0.93 |
Planned codes | 3 | 15 | 8.68 | 2.79 | −0.41 | −0.03 | 5 | 19 | 11.13 | 3.50 | 0.40 | −0.52 |
Expressive attention | 4 | 16 | 9.64 | 3.27 | 0.37 | −1.08 | 1 | 16 | 9.38 | 3.43 | 0.21 | −0.31 |
Number detection (**) | 8 | 15 | 11.1 | 1.95 | 0.25 | −0.99 | 8 | 17 | 11.78 | 2.62 | 0.35 | −1.03 |
Receptive attention | 5 | 16 | 11.32 | 2.28 | −0.54 | 0.01 | 5 | 18 | 10.96 | 2.81 | −0.13 | 0.32 |
Working Memory | ||||||||||||
Paths | ||||||||||||
Corsi’s backward span |
Matching Numbers | Planned Codes | Expressive Attention | Number Detection | Receptive Attention | Paths | Corsi’s Backward Span | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Matching numbers | 1 | 0.40 ** | 0.33 ** | 0.41 ** | 0.36 ** | 0.07 | 0.03 |
Planned codes | 1 | 0.13 | 0.43 ** | 0.58 ** | 0.03 | −0.18 | |
Expressive attention | 1 | 0.27 ** | 0.23 * | 0.25 * | 0.04 | ||
Number detection | 1 | 0.51 ** | 0.03 | −0.02 | |||
Receptive attention | 1 | 0.19 | −0.03 | ||||
Paths | 1 | 0.04 | |||||
Corsi’s backward span | 1 |
Measure | Matching Numbers Task | Planned Codes Task | Expressive Attention | Number Detection Task | Receptive Attention | Paths | Corsi’s Backward Span | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Task | Task | |||||||
2nd | Non-homophone errors | −0.12 | −0.28 * | 0.07 | −0.40 ** | −0.12 | −0.16 | −0.37 ** |
Homophone errors | −0.28 * | −0.23 | 0.01 | −0.26 * | −0.14 | −0.14 | −0.30 * | |
Handwriting Speed | 0.46 ** | 0.39 ** | 0.03 | 0.42 ** | 0.27 * | 0.09 | 0.12 | |
3rd | Non-homophone errors | 0.01 | −0.05 | 0.14 | −0.13 | 0.06 | −0.23 | 0.06 |
Homophone errors | −0.04 | −0.13 | 0.21 | −0.14 | 0.01 | −0.24 * | −0.21 | |
Handwriting Speed | 0.01 | 0.26 * | 0.01 | 0.33 ** | 0.18 | 0.22 | 0.01 |
Non-Homophone Errors (2nd Grade) (N = 59) | Independent Variables (2nd Grade) | B | SEB | t | p | Partial η2 |
R2adj = 0.30 *** | Intercept | 4.277 | 0.793 | 5.392 | <0.001 | 0.316 |
Matching numbers task (Planning, Selective attention) | 0.036 | 0.050 | 0.712 | 0.479 | 0.008 | |
Planned codes task (Planning, Inhibition) | −0.110 | 0.052 | −2.104 | 0.039 | 0.066 | |
Expressive attention task (Inhibit automatic response, interference control) | 0.015 | 0.038 | 0.393 | 0.695 | 0.002 | |
Number detection task (Selective Attention, shifting focus) | −0.007 | 0.002 | −3.473 | 0.001 | 0.161 | |
Receptive attention task (Focused Attention) | −0.142 | 0.048 | −2.927 | 0.005 | 0.120 | |
Paths (spatial-sequential WM) | −0.343 | 0.126 | −2.719 | 0.008 | 0.105 | |
Corsi’s backward span (Visuo-spatial WM) | −0.210 | 0.128 | −1.640 | 0.106 | 0.041 | |
Homophone Errors (2nd Grade) (N = 59) | Independent Variables (2nd Grade) | B | SEB | t | p | Partial η2 |
R2adj = 0.11 * | Intercept | 2.196 | 0.377 | 5.831 | <0.001 | 0.351 |
Matching numbers task (Planning, Selective attention) | −0.042 | 0.024 | −1.745 | 0.086 | 0.046 | |
Planned codes task (Planning, Inhibition) | −0.015 | 0.025 | −0.607 | 0.546 | 0.006 | |
Expressive attention task (Inhibit automatic response, interference control) | 0.020 | 0.018 | 1.130 | 0.263 | 0.020 | |
Number detection task (Selective Attention, shifting focus) | −0.001 | 0.001 | −0.754 | 0.454 | 0.009 | |
Receptive attention task (Focused Attention) | 0.014 | 0.023 | 0.618 | 0.539 | 0.006 | |
Paths (spatial-sequential WM) | −0.124 | 0.060 | −2.066 | 0.043 | 0.063 | |
Corsi’s backward span (Visuo-spatial WM) | 0.031 | 0.061 | 0.513 | 0.610 | 0.004 | |
Handwriting Speed (N = 59) (2nd Grade) | Independent Variables (2nd Grade) | B | SEB | t | p | Partial η2 |
R2adj = 0.21 ** | Intercept | 123.958 | 1007.803 | 0.123 | 0.903 | <0.001 |
Matching numbers task (Planning, Selective attention) | 145.902 | 63.985 | 2.280 | 0.026 | 0.076 | |
Planned codes task (Planning, Inhibition) | 103.658 | 66.683 | 1.554 | 0.125 | 0.037 | |
Expressive attention task (Inhibit automatic response, interference control) | −9.493 | 48.211 | −0.197 | 0.845 | 0.001 | |
Number detection task (Selective Attention, shifting focus) | 3.594 | 2.411 | 1.490 | 0.141 | 0.034 | |
Receptive attention task (Focused Attention) | −50.776 | 61.589 | −0.824 | 0.413 | 0.011 | |
Paths (spatial-sequential WM) | −19.113 | 160.532 | −0.119 | 0.906 | <0.001 | |
Corsi’s backward span (Visuo-spatial WM) | 77.940 | 162.718 | 0.479 | 0.634 | 0.004 | |
Non-Homophone Errors (3rd Grade) (N = 53) | Independent Variables (3nd Grade) | B | SEB | t | p | Partial η2 |
R2adj = 0.02 | Intercept | 4.462 | 1.318 | 3.387 | 0.002 | 0.223 |
Matching numbers task (Planning, Selective attention) | 0.048 | 0.072 | 0.675 | 0.504 | 0.011 | |
Planned codes task (Planning, Inhibition) | −0.130 | 0.083 | −1.554 | 0.128 | 0.057 | |
Expressive attention task (Inhibit automatic response, interference control) | −0.004 | 0.062 | −0.068 | 0.946 | <0.001 | |
Number detection task (Selective Attention, shifting focus) | −0.001 | 0.004 | −0.201 | 0.841 | 0.001 | |
Receptive attention task (Focused Attention) | 0.010 | 0.097 | 0.101 | 0.920 | <0.001 | |
Paths (spatial-sequential WM) | −0.141 | 0.327 | −0.430 | 0.669 | 0.005 | |
Corsi’s backward span (Visuo-spatial WM) | −0.024 | 0.159 | −0.154 | 0.879 | 0.001 | |
Homophone Errors (3rd Grade) (N = 53) | Independent Variables (3rd Grade) | B | SEB | t | p | Partial η2 |
R2adj = 0.20 * | Intercept | 3.090 | 0.433 | 7.128 | <0.001 | 0.560 |
Matching numbers task (Planning, Selective attention) | −0.001 | 0.024 | −0.055 | 0.956 | <0.001 | |
Planned codes task (Planning, Inhibition) | −0.073 | 0.027 | −2.654 | 0.011 | 0.150 | |
Expressive attention task (Inhibit automatic response, interference control) | 0.020 | 0.021 | 0.970 | 0.338 | 0.023 | |
Number detection task (Selective Attention, shifting focus) | −0.001 | 0.001 | −0.504 | 0.617 | 0.006 | |
Receptive attention task (Focused Attention) | −0.021 | 0.032 | −0.649 | 0.520 | 0.010 | |
Paths (spatial-sequential WM) | −0.196 | 0.108 | −1.823 | 0.076 | 0.077 | |
Corsi’s backward span (Visuo-spatial WM) | −0.009 | 0.052 | −0.173 | 0.864 | 0.001 | |
Handwriting Speed (3rd Grade) (N = 53) | Independent Variables (3rd Grade) | B | SEB | t | p | Partial η2 |
R2adj = 0.07 | Intercept | 3287.292 | 1964.346 | 1.673 | 0.102 | 0.065 |
Matching numbers task (Planning, Selective attention) | 69.395 | 106.682 | 0.650 | 0.519 | 0.010 | |
Planned codes task (Planning, Inhibition) | 34.066 | 124.319 | 0.274 | 0.785 | 0.002 | |
Expressive attention task (Inhibit automatic response, interference control) | 159.808 | 92.968 | 1.719 | 0.093 | 0.069 | |
Number detection task (Selective Attention, shifting focus) | −8.388 | 5.412 | −1.550 | 0.129 | 0.057 | |
Receptive attention task (Focused Attention) | 189.975 | 144.315 | 1.316 | 0.196 | 0.042 | |
Paths (spatial-sequential WM) | −312.355 | 487.630 | −0.641 | 0.525 | 0.010 | |
Corsi’s backward span (Visuo-spatial WM) | −236.092 | 237.436 | −0.994 | 0.326 | 0.024 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Bigozzi, L.; Malagoli, C.; Pecini, C.; Pezzica, S.; Vezzani, C.; Vettori, G. Attention Components and Spelling Accuracy: Which Connections Matter? Children 2021, 8, 539. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8070539
Bigozzi L, Malagoli C, Pecini C, Pezzica S, Vezzani C, Vettori G. Attention Components and Spelling Accuracy: Which Connections Matter? Children. 2021; 8(7):539. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8070539
Chicago/Turabian StyleBigozzi, Lucia, Chiara Malagoli, Chiara Pecini, Sara Pezzica, Claudio Vezzani, and Giulia Vettori. 2021. "Attention Components and Spelling Accuracy: Which Connections Matter?" Children 8, no. 7: 539. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8070539