Getting to the bottom of orthographic depth.
Open accessAbstract
Orthographic depth has been studied intensively as one of the sources of cross-linguistic differences in reading, and yet there has been little detailed analysis of what is meant by orthographic depth. Here we propose that orthographic depth is a conglomerate of two separate constructs: the complexity of print-to-speech correspondences and the unpredictability of the derivation of the pronunciations of words on the basis of their orthography. We show that on a linguistic level, these two concepts can be dissociated. Furthermore, we make different predictions about how the two concepts would affect skilled reading and reading acquisition. We argue that refining the definition of orthographic depth opens up new research questions. Addressing these can provide insights into the specific mechanisms by which language-level orthographic properties affect cognitive processes underlying reading.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 Arabic orthography has a voweled orthography that is largely transparent and an unvoweled orthography that is phonologically underspecified but morphologically regular and transparent.
“This two-layered system of optional diacritics results in two orthographies: a voweled orthography largely transparent: regular and consistent (Schmalz et al., 2015) and an unvoweled orthography, which is an abjad (Daniels, 1992) that is phonologically underspecified and maps only the consonants and long vowels of words, but is morphologically regular and maps both the root and the consonantal and”
From Development and relationships between phonological awareness, morphological awareness and word reading in spoken and standard Arabic (2018) · cites this paper as Schmalz et al., 2015
The paper discusses omitted vowels and incomplete pronunciation information in Hebrew in ‘Orthographic depth in theories and models of reading’ (page unavailable), but that does not establish the claim about Arabic. Searches for Arabic, voweled orthography, and diacritics found no passage in our copy addressing the transparency of voweled Arabic, the part cited to Schmalz et al. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 104 · Cited by 195
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- X · DOI
- Authors
- Schmalz, X., Marinus, E., Coltheart, M., & Castles, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Padua (IT)
- Macquarie University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Schmalz, Xenia
- Venue
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
- Published
- 2015-04-17
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1614-1629
- ISSN
- 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5320
- OpenAlex
- W2038217642
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 104
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- orthographic depth, skilled reading, reading acquisition, word recognition
- MeSH terms
- Cognition, Humans, Learning, Linguistics, Reading, Speech
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
