Goodwin Amanda P, Petscher Yaacov, Carlisle Joanne F, Mitchell Alison M
Vanderbilt University's Peabody College, Florida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University, University of Michigan.
J Res Read. 2017 Feb;40(1):91-117. doi: 10.1111/1467-9817.12064. Epub 2015 Dec 22.
This study examined the dimensionality of morphological knowledge. The performance of 371 seventh- and eighth-graders on seven morphological knowledge tasks was investigated using confirmatory factor analysis. Results suggested that morphological knowledge was best fit by a bifactor model with a general factor of morphological knowledge and seven specific factors, representing tasks that tap different facets of morphological knowledge. Next, structural equation modelling was used to explore links to literacy outcomes. Results indicated the general factor and the specific factor of morphological meaning processing showed significant positive associations with reading comprehension and vocabulary. Also, the specific factor of generating morphologically related words showed significant positive associations with vocabulary, while specific factors of morphological word reading and spelling processing showed small negative relationships to reading comprehension and vocabulary. Findings highlight the complexity of morphological knowledge and suggest the importance of being cognizant of the nature of morphology when designing and interpreting studies.
本研究考察了形态学知识的维度。使用验证性因素分析对371名七年级和八年级学生在七项形态学知识任务上的表现进行了调查。结果表明，形态学知识最适合用一个双因素模型来拟合，该模型有一个形态学知识的一般因素和七个特定因素，代表了涉及形态学知识不同方面的任务。接下来，使用结构方程模型来探索与读写能力结果的联系。结果表明，形态学意义处理的一般因素和特定因素与阅读理解和词汇量呈显著正相关。此外，生成形态相关单词的特定因素与词汇量呈显著正相关，而形态学单词阅读和拼写处理的特定因素与阅读理解和词汇量呈小的负相关。研究结果突出了形态学知识的复杂性，并表明在设计和解释研究时认识形态学本质的重要性。
