CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,379Reading and Literacy DevelopmentLanguage Development and DisordersPhonetics and Phonology Research

Explicit syllable and phoneme segmentation in the young child

Liberman, Isabelle Y, Shankweiler, Donald, Fischer, F.William, Carter, Bonnie·1974·Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
DOI 10.1016/0022-0965(74)90101-5
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0022-0965(74)90101-5

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Script Dependent Hypothesis suggests that first language reading efficiency does not necessarily influence reading abilities in a second language.

    “the Script Dependent Hypothesis (SDH), which suggests that first language reading efficiency does not necessarily influence reading abilities in a second language (Liberman, Shankweiler, Fischer, & Carter, 1974;Lindgren, Dernzi, & Richman, 1985).”

    From Cognitive Retroactive Transfer (CRT) of Language Skills among Trilingual Arabic-Hebrew and English Learners (2014) · cites this paper as Liberman, Shankweiler, Fischer, & Carter, 1974

  • Studies that revealed cross-language transfer of morphological skills support Cummins's Interdependence Hypothesis, while findings of non-transfer of morphological awareness from English to other languages with shallow orthographies support the Script Dependent Hypothesis.

    “In summary, studies that revealed cross-language transfer of morphological skills support Cummins's IH (1979,1981), while findings of non-transfer of morphological awareness from English to other languages with shallow orthographies support the SDH (Liberman et al., 1974;Lindgren et al., 1985).”

    From Cognitive Retroactive Transfer (CRT) of Language Skills among Trilingual Arabic-Hebrew and English Learners (2014) · cites this paper as Liberman et al., 1974

  • There was no transfer of orthographic skills from English L3 to either Arabic L1 or Hebrew L2.

    “In conclusion, the findings indicate that there was no transfer of orthographic skills from English L3 to either Arabic L1 or Hebrew L2, which supports the Script Dependent Hypothesis (Liberman et al., 1974;Lindgren et al., 1985).”

    From Cognitive Retroactive Transfer (CRT) of Language Skills among Trilingual Arabic-Hebrew and English Learners (2014) · cites this paper as Liberman et al., 1974

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liberman, I. Y., Shankweiler, D., Fischer, F. W., & Carter, B.
Affiliations
University of Connecticut (US)
ORCID
Fischer, F.William
Venue
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1974-10
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
201-212
ISSN
0022-0965 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0022-0965(74)90101-5
OpenAlex
W2117404433
Cited by
1,379
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 91 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 37
FWCI
6.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
Keywords
syllabification, phoneme segmentation, speech segmentation, preschool children, kindergarten children, first grade students, developmental order, alphabetic writing systems, syllabary, reading acquisition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review