• Citer

Does learning to read contribute to the development of working memory ?

par Demoulin, Catherine ;Kolinsky, Régine ;Morais, Jose
Référence 6ème Journée des Doctorants (28 Octobre 2013: ULB)
Publication Non publié, 2013-10-28

Poster de conférence

• Accès en ligne
• Détails
• Contenu
• Statistiques

Résumé :

Does learning to read boost the development of working memory? Many studies have demonstrated a strong association between working memory (WM) capacities and early reading abilities, most of them emphasizing the role of the former on the latter 1. However, studies comparing illiterate and literate adults on WM tasks suggest that literacy acquisition has a beneficial impact on memory processes and representations 2-3. In a majority of western countries, reading instruction starts in first-grade and constitutes the major part of the curriculum. Decoding activities are very demanding tasks that strongly recruit WM and controlled attention. This intensive practice of the WM processes could act as a cognitive training for young children and might be a factor of the substantial WM developmental enhancement occurring around 7 years. Hence the aim of this study was to examine if age-matched pre-literate children and beginning readers differ in terms of WM capacity. Using a cutoff design, we compared performance on STM, WM and attentional tasks of children (i) of similar ages but either still preliterate or already decoders (3rd kindergarteners vs. 1st graders, born at the beginning vs. end of the year) and (ii) of different ages but similar reading levels (1st graders born at the beginning vs. end of the year, both decoders). Groups were matched on critical control variables according to background information gathered from assessments and parental questionnaires. Results revealed that youngest 1st graders (Y1), as a group, outperformed their age-matched kindergarteners counterparts (i.e., oldest 3rd kindergarteners) on the WM (backward digit span) and visual attentional (Nepsy subtest) tasks. In Y1, the higher the reading score, the higher the WM score. In Grade 1, there was no difference in WM between the youngest and oldest children. These results suggest a schooling effect on the WM growth. As learning to read recruits actively the WM system, we believe that this intense activity could be one of the reasons of the progress observed. Further developmental studies on WM should not neglect the reciprocal effect of literacy acquisition on cognitive processes. However, at this stage, we cannot conclude that the differences observed are strictly due to literacy per se, as we do not know the WM capacities of the Grade 1 before its acquisition. Moreover, we did not control the possible effect of arithmetic activities on WM development. Therefore, we will continue this study (1) longitudinally, (2) by adding an arithmetic subtest, and (3) by testing a new cohort to enlarge the sample. References:1. Gathercole, S., & Baddeley, A. (1993). Phonological working memory: A critical building block for reading development and vocabulary acquisition? European Journal of Psychology of Education, 8, 259–272. 2. Kosmidis, M.H., Zafiri, M., & Polytimou, N., (2011). Literacy versus formal schooling: Influence on working memory. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 26 (7), 575-582.3. Silva, C., Faísca, L., Ingvar, M., Petersson, K.M., & Reis, A. (2012). Literacy: Exploring Working Memory Systems. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 34 (4), 369-377.