语音记忆和中央执行功能在不同年级儿童解码和语言理解中的作用

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00469

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

选取256名三~六年级儿童, 采用相关分析、结构方程模型等方法考察了语音记忆和中央执行功能在不同年级儿童的解码和语言理解中的作用。结果显示, 在低年级阶段, 语音记忆和刷新对解码存在显著预测作用, 转换和刷新对语言理解存在显著预测作用; 在高年级阶段, 只有刷新对解码保持着稳定的预测作用。这表明, 语音记忆和中央执行功能对儿童的解码和语言理解存在不同的影响, 并且这种影响会随着年级的增长发生变化。

关键词: 语音记忆, 中央执行功能, 小学儿童, 解码, 语言理解

Abstract:

Reading comprehension is one of the most complex behaviors that we engage in on a regular basis. Decoding and language comprehension are two important components of reading comprehension. While up to now, little research has been devoted to directly explore the effects of phonological memory and central executive function on diverse reading comprehension components (decoding and language comprehension). In addition, the primary school stage is a critical period of development of children's reading ability and cognitive ability. However, few research has focused on the developmental changes in the relationship of phonological memory, central executive function and reading comprehension among children in different grades. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine the contribution of phonological memory and central executive function on decoding and language comprehension of children in different grade levels.

Two hundred and fifty-six children completed Chinese Characters Reading, Chinese Word Reading, and Pseudo-Word Reading to investigate decoding ability, as well as a Listening Comprehension Test to exam language comprehension. Additionally, we used Digit Span and Non-word Span to measure children's phonological memory, and GO/NOGO task, Stroop task, Digit updating task and Digit shifting task to investigate children's central executive function. Correlation analysis and structural equation models (SEM) were used to investigate the effects of phonological memory and central executive function on decoding, language comprehension of children in different grades.

Results indicated that, the effect of phonological memory and updating on decoding were significant. Also, the effect of updating and shifting on language comprehension were significant. On further analysis, we divided the four grades into two levels based on the reading stage theory, that third grade and fourth grade as one level, fifth grade and sixth grade as another level. In the third grade and fourth grade level, phonological memory and updating accuracy contributed to decoding. Moreover, updating accuracy and shifting cost predicted language comprehension. In the fifth grade and sixth grade level, only the effect of updating on decoding was significant.The results indicated that, the prediction of phonological memory on decoding disappeared as children progress through school. More importantly, we found that updating had a relatively stable contribution to decoding across grade levels.

It revealed that different functions of working memory played different roles in reading, which seem that not all cognitive abilities are equally important in the reading process. Furthermore, phonological memory and central executive function produced different predictive effects in decoding and language comprehension as the grades grew.

Key words: phonological memory, central executive function, primary school children, decoding, language comprehension

中图分类号:

B844

赵鑫, 李红利, 金戈, 李世峰, 周爱保, 梁文佳, 郭红霞, 蔡亚亚. (2020). 语音记忆和中央执行功能在不同年级儿童解码和语言理解中的作用. 心理学报, 52(4), 469-484.

ZHAO Xin, LI Hongli, JIN Ge, LI Shifeng, ZHOU Aibao, LIANG Wenjia, GUO Hongxia, CAI Yaya. (2020). Effects of phonological memory and central executive function on decoding, language comprehension of children in different grades. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(4), 469-484.

图/表 10

参考文献 51

[1]	Arrington C. N., Kulesz P. A., Francis D. J., Fletcher J. M., & Barnes M. A . (2014). The contribution of attentional control and working memory to reading comprehension and decoding. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(5), 325-346.
[2]	Baddeley A . (1992). Working memory and conscious awareness. In Theories of Memory(pp. 11-20). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[3]	Baddeley A . (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(10), 829-839.
[4]	Baddeley A., Gathercole S., & Papagno C . (1998). The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review, 105(1), 158-173.
[5]	Borella E., Carretti B., & Pelegrina S . (2010). The specific role of inhibition in reading comprehension in good and poor comprehenders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(6), 541-552.
[6]	Butterfuss R., & Kendeou P . (2018). The role of executive functions in reading comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 801-826.
[7]	Carretti B., Borella E., Elosúa M. R., Gómez-Veiga I., & García-Madruga J. A . (2017). Improvements in reading comprehension performance after a training program focusing on executive processes of working memory. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, 1(3), 268-279.
[8]	Carretti B., Cornoldi C., de Beni R., & Romanò M . (2005). Updating in working memory: A comparison of good and poor comprehenders. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 91(1), 45-66.
[9]	Catts H. W., Adlof S. M., Hogan T. P., & Weismer S. E . (2005). Are specific language impairment and dyslexia distinct disorders?. Journal of Speech Language & Hearing Research, 48(6), 1378-1396.
[10]	Christopher M. E., Miyake A., Keenan J. M., Pennington B., Defries J. C., Wadsworth S. J., ... Olson R. K . (2012). Predicting word reading and comprehension with executive function and speed measures across development: A latent variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(3), 470-488.
[11]	Cutting L. E., Materek A., Cole C. A. S., Levine T. M., & Mahone E. M . (2009). Effects of fluency, oral language, and executive function on reading comprehension performance. Annals of Dyslexia, 59(1), 34-54.
[12]	Dale E., & Chall J. S . (1948). A formula for predicting readability: Instructions. Educational Research Bulletin, 27(2), 37-54.
[13]	Eason S. H., Goldberg L. F., Young K. M., Geist M. C., & Cutting L. E . (2012). Reader-text interactions: How differential text and question types influence cognitive skills needed for reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 515-528.
[14]	Fiske S. T., Kendeou P., McMaster K. L., & Christ T. J . (2016). Reading comprehension: Core components and processes. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 62-69.
[15]	Fortier V., & Simard D . (2017). Exploring the contribution of phonological memory to meta-syntactic abilities in bilingual children. Language Awareness, 26(2), 78-95.
[16]	García-Madruga J. A., Vila J. O., Gómez-Veiga I., Duque G., & Elosúa M. R . (2014). Executive processes, reading comprehension and academic achievement in 3th grade primary students. Learning and Individual Differences, 35(5), 41-48.
[17]	Gathercole S. E., Tiffany C., Briscoe J., & Thorn A . (2005). Developmental consequences of poor phonological short- term memory function in childhood: A longitudinal study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(6), 598-611.
[18]	Gough P. B., & Tunmer W. E . (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10.
[19]	Gupta P., & Tisdale J . (2009). Does phonological short-term memory causally determine vocabulary learning? Toward a computational resolution of the debate. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(4), 481-502.
[20]	Harm M. W., & Seidenberg M. S . (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111(3), 662-720.
[21]	Ho C. S. H., & Bryant P . (1997). Phonological skills are important in learning to read Chinese. Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 946-951.
[22]	Jared D., Ashby J., Agauas S. J., & Levy B. A . (2016). Phonological activation of word meanings in grade 5 readers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 42(4), 524-541.
[23]	Kieffer M. J., Vukovic R. K., & Berry D . (2013). Roles of attention shifting and inhibitory control in fourth-grade reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(4), 333-348.
[24]	Leong C. K., Tse S. K., Loh K. Y., & Hau K. T . (2008). Text comprehension in Chinese children: Relative contribution of verbal working memory, pseudoword reading, rapid automatized naming, and onset-rime phonological segmentation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 135-149.
[25]	Loosli S. V., Buschkuehl M., Perrig W. J., & Jaeggi S. M . (2012). Working memory training improves reading processes in typically developing children. Child Neuropsychology, 18(1), 62-78.
[26]	McDougall S., Hulme C., Ellis A., & Monk A . (1994). Learning to read: The role of short-term memory and phonological skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 58(1), 112-133.
[27]	Meixner J. M., Warner G. J., Lensing N., Schiefele U., & Elsner B . (2018). The relation between executive functions and reading comprehension in primary-school students: A cross-lagged-panel analysis. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 46, 62-74.
[28]	Miyake A., Friedman N. P., Emerson M. J., Witzki A. H., Howerter A., & Wager T. D . (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49-100.
[29]	Montgomery J. W., Magimairaj B. M., & Finney M. C . (2010). Working memory and specific language impairment: An update on the relation and perspectives on assessment and treatment. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19(1), 78-94.
[30]	Oakhill J. V., Cain K., & Bryant P. E . (2003). The dissociation of word reading and text comprehension: Evidence from component skills. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(4), 443-468.
[31]	O'Brien I., Segalowitz N., Freed B., & Collentine J . (2007). Phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(4), 557-581.
[32]	Palladino P., Cornoldi C., de Beni R., & Pazzaglia F . (2001). Working memory and updating processes in reading comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 29(2), 344-354.
[33]	Peng P., Barnes M., Wang C., Wang W., Li S., Swanson H., ... Tao S . (2017). A meta-analysis on the relation between reading and working memory. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1), 48-76.
[34]	Perfetti C., & Stafura J . (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 22-37.
[35]	Potocki A., Sanchez M., Ecalle J., & Magnan A . (2017). Linguistic and cognitive profiles of 8- to 15-year-old children with specific reading comprehension difficulties: The role of executive functions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(2), 128-142.
[36]	Ramus F., Marshall C. R., Rosen S., & van der Lely H. K. J. (2013). Phonological deficits in specific language impairment and developmental dyslexia: Towards a multidimensional model. Brain, 136(2), 630-645.
[37]	Savage R., Lavers N., & Pillay V . (2007). Working memory and reading difficulties: What we know and what we don’t know about the relationship. Educational Psychology Review, 19(2), 185-221.
[38]	Seigneuric A., & Ehrlich M . (2005). Contribution of working memory capacity to children's reading comprehension: A longitudinal investigation. Reading and Writing, 18(7), 617-656.
[39]	Sesma H. W., Mahone E. M., Levine T., Eason S. H., & Cutting L. E . (2009). The contribution of executive skills to reading comprehension. Child Neuropsychology, 15(3), 232-246.
[40]	Song S., Su M., Kang C., Liu H., Zhang Y., McBride‐Chang C., ... Shu H . (2015). Tracing children's vocabulary development from preschool through the school-age years: An 8-year longitudinal study. Developmental Science, 18(1), 119-131.
[41]	Stuart M . (2006). Learning to read: Developing processes for recognizing, understanding and pronouncing written words. London Review of Education, 4(1), 19-29.
[42]	Swanson H. L . (2000). Are working memory deficits in readers with learning disabilities hard to change?. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(6), 551-566.
[43]	Swanson H. L., Zheng X., & Jerman O . (2009). Working memory, short-term memory, and reading disabilities: A selective meta-analysis of the literature. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(3), 260-287.
[44]	Tunmer W. E., & Chapman J. W . (2012). The simple view of reading redux: Vocabulary knowledge and the independent components hypothesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(5), 453-466.
[45]	van Dyke J. A., Johns C. L., & Kukona A . (2014). Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition, 131(3), 373-403.
[46]	Wang X. L., Chen G. P., Ma J. Z., Sun X. Q., Sun Z. F . (2013). Development of working memory from 6 to 9 years of age. Journal of Psychological Science, 36(1), 92-97.
	[ 王晓丽, 陈国鹏, 马娟子, 孙秀庆, 孙志凤 . (2013). 6-9岁儿童工作记忆的发展研究. 心理科学, 36(1), 92-97.]
[47]	Xue J., Shu H., Li H., Li W., & Tian X . (2013). The stability of literacy-related cognitive contributions to chinese character naming and reading fluency. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 42(5), 433-450.
[48]	Yovanoff P., Duesbery L., Alonzo J., & Tindal G . (2005). Grade‐level invariance of a theoretical causal structure predicting reading comprehension with vocabulary and oral reading fluency. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(3), 4-12.
[49]	Zhang H-C., & Wang X-P . (1989), Standardization research on Raven’s standard progressive matrices in China. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 21(2), 113-121.
	[ 张厚粲, 王晓平 . (1989). 瑞文标准推理测验在我国的修订. 心理学报, 21(2), 113-121.]
[50]	Zhang D . (2017). Multidimensionality of morphological awareness and text comprehension among young Chinese readers in a multilingual context. Learning & Individual Differences, 56, 13-23.
[51]	Zhao X., Chen L., & Maes J. H. R. (2018). Training and transfer effects of response inhibition training in children and adults. Developmental Science, 21(1), e12511-n/a.

年级	总计	男	女	年龄(M ± SD, 岁)
三年级	77	45	32	8.73 ± 0.68
四年级	81	39	42	9.85 ± 0.70
五年级	51	22	29	10.79 ± 0.46
六年级	46	25	21	11.87 ± 0.53
总计	255	131	124	10.06 ± 1.28

年级	总计	男	女	年龄(M ± SD, 岁)
三年级	77	45	32	8.73 ± 0.68
四年级	81	39	42	9.85 ± 0.70
五年级	51	22	29	10.79 ± 0.46
六年级	46	25	21	11.87 ± 0.53
总计	255	131	124	10.06 ± 1.28

测验	三年级 (n = 77)		四年级 (n = 81)		五年级 (n = 51)		六年级 (n = 46)		F (3, 251)	η_p²	事后比较
测验	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F (3, 251)	η_p²	事后比较
一般认知能力	36.32	8.02	37.02	6.94	38.33	7.17	40.35	7.68	3.15^*	0.04	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
解码
汉字认读测验	78.88	24.27	88.75	18.63	114.43	12.60	121.76	9.54	73.69^***	0.47	三年级 < 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
词语阅读测验	74.92	29.72	94.52	23.63	123.08	13.20	135.28	9.60	90.34^***	0.52	三年级 < 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
非词阅读测验	23.47	8.43	25.43	6.98	33.96	5.52	36.24	4.15	50.39^***	0.38	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
语言理解
听力理解测验	26.53	4.95	27.65	5.27	31.71	3.80	32.28	3.39	23.34^***	0.22	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
语音记忆
数字广度	5.88	0.90	5.99	0.87	6.22	0.89	6.48	1.04	4.78^**	0.05	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 < 六年级
非词广度	2.77	0.69	2.72	0.67	3.02	0.59	3.23	0.62	7.49^***	0.08	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
Stroop
干扰效应(ms)	36.09	68.43	24.75	59.03	40.41	79.34	31.36	55.39	0.70	0.01	n.s.
GO/NOGO
NOGO正确率	0.87	0.12	0.89	0.08	0.89	0.12	0.92	0.08	2.89^*	0.03	三年级 < 六年级
刷新
简单刷新正确率	0.56	0.22	0.64	0.21	0.75	0.17	0.76	0.15	14.65^***	0.15	三年级 = 四年级 = 五年级 < 六年级
困难刷新正确率	0.58	0.25	0.65	0.23	0.73	0.22	0.76	0.17	7.79^***	0.09	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
转换
转换代价(ms)	170.02	174.07	190.67	169.76	213.76	174.61	250.67	211.57	2.10	0.03	n.s.

测验	三年级 (n = 77)		四年级 (n = 81)		五年级 (n = 51)		六年级 (n = 46)		F (3, 251)	η_p²	事后比较
测验	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F (3, 251)	η_p²	事后比较
一般认知能力	36.32	8.02	37.02	6.94	38.33	7.17	40.35	7.68	3.15^*	0.04	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
解码
汉字认读测验	78.88	24.27	88.75	18.63	114.43	12.60	121.76	9.54	73.69^***	0.47	三年级 < 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
词语阅读测验	74.92	29.72	94.52	23.63	123.08	13.20	135.28	9.60	90.34^***	0.52	三年级 < 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
非词阅读测验	23.47	8.43	25.43	6.98	33.96	5.52	36.24	4.15	50.39^***	0.38	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
语言理解
听力理解测验	26.53	4.95	27.65	5.27	31.71	3.80	32.28	3.39	23.34^***	0.22	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
语音记忆
数字广度	5.88	0.90	5.99	0.87	6.22	0.89	6.48	1.04	4.78^**	0.05	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 < 六年级
非词广度	2.77	0.69	2.72	0.67	3.02	0.59	3.23	0.62	7.49^***	0.08	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
Stroop
干扰效应(ms)	36.09	68.43	24.75	59.03	40.41	79.34	31.36	55.39	0.70	0.01	n.s.
GO/NOGO
NOGO正确率	0.87	0.12	0.89	0.08	0.89	0.12	0.92	0.08	2.89^*	0.03	三年级 < 六年级
刷新
简单刷新正确率	0.56	0.22	0.64	0.21	0.75	0.17	0.76	0.15	14.65^***	0.15	三年级 = 四年级 = 五年级 < 六年级
困难刷新正确率	0.58	0.25	0.65	0.23	0.73	0.22	0.76	0.17	7.79^***	0.09	三年级 = 四年级 < 五年级 = 六年级
转换
转换代价(ms)	170.02	174.07	190.67	169.76	213.76	174.61	250.67	211.57	2.10	0.03	n.s.

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1 年龄	1
2 一般认知能力	0.12^*	1
3 解码成绩	0.58^**	0.31^**	1
4 语言理解成绩	0.35^**	0.35^**	0.65^**	1
5 语音记忆	0.23^**	0.19^**	0.36^**	0.30^**	1
6 干扰效应(ms)	-0.02	-0.11	0.05	0.03	0.07	1
7 NOGO正确率	0.16^**	0.15^*	0.15^*	0.20^**	0.14^*	-0.03	1
8 刷新成绩	0.29^**	0.38^**	0.48^**	0.47^**	0.37^**	-0.02	0.39^**	1
9 转换代价(ms)	0.10	0.16^*	0.18^**	0.29^**	0.11	0.03	0.23^**	0.26^**	1