EXPOSURE TO “TEXTISMS” DOES NOT LOWER SPELLING SCORES FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN
Holly Anderson1 & Robert J.F. Elsner1 Show affiliations
- Erskine College, United States
Current Research in Psychology, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp. 89–95 · doi.org/10.3844/crpsp.2014.89.95
Abstract
“Textisms” are semi-standardized abbreviations and conventions uses in SMS text messaging. Students in the fourth and fifth grades (N = 136) were exposed to words on a spelling list as correctly-spelled words, incorrectly-spelled words, or “textisms” to determine whether short term exposure to “textisms” decreased spelling performance for elementary aged children. Multivariate ANOVA found exposure type significantly impacted post-exposure spelling, F(3,132) = 5.483, p<0.001. Individual t-tests for each group found exposure to correctly spelled words significantly improved spelling ability on spelling posttest, t(35) = 5.399, p<0.0001, unlike exposure to incorrectly spelled words, t(29) = -1.96, p<0.060. Textisms similar to traditional English spellings showed almost no change in spelling ability, t(28) = -0.064, p<0.950, exposure to non-traditional orthographic forms showed a slight decrease from pretest to posttest, t(40) = 1.39, p<0.172. Difference in posttest scores between participants in the two textism groups suggests that children may derive orthographic information from some textism forms, but do not decrease spelling abilities because of limited exposure to textisms.
Licence and reuse
Open access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence (CC BY 3.0), as printed on the article, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original authors and the source. No permission is needed.
How to reuse this articleResponses (0)
About this article
Anderson, H. & Elsner, R. J. (2014). EXPOSURE TO “TEXTISMS” DOES NOT LOWER SPELLING SCORES FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN. Current Research in Psychology, 5(2), 89–95. https://doi.org/10.3844/crpsp.2014.89.95
- Licence
- CC BY 3.0
- Issue
- Volume 5, Issue 2
- Policies
- Editorial independenceUse of generative AIData availabilityAppeals and complaints
- Version
- Version of record
