Morphological Awareness Matters for Language and Reading Skills: A Meta-Analysis

• In Event: Mapping Morphology and Its Multidimensionality, Assessment, Relations to Outcomes, and Relation to Covariates

Abstract

Purpose:
A wide array of studies found that morphological awareness is related to other language and literacy skills. In this study, we used meta-analysis to examine and estimate the relation of morphological awareness with phonological awareness, orthographic awareness, vocabulary, word reading/decoding, spelling, text reading fluency, and reading comprehension, and potential moderators of the relations (e.g., grade level, L1/L2 status, orthographic depth of language, implicit vs explicit morphological awareness, inflectional vs derivational vs compound morphological awareness).

Method:
Studies were systematically searched using multiple databases (e.g., Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I, PsycINFO, and Sociological Abstracts, and ProQuest databases). Of the initially identified 5,232 articles, a total of 64 articles (N = 16,119) met our inclusion criteria: studies published from 1980 to 2018, published in English, included pre-K to adult participants, and reported the relation of morphological awareness with at least one of the aforementioned skills (e.g., vocabulary, word reading/decoding). The studies were coded for study participant characteristics (e.g., sample size, age, grade, sex, race, socio-economic status), relation (e.g., morphological awareness and phonological awareness), effect size (Pearson's r), and type of morphological awareness (e.g., implicit, derivational) for statistical analysis. metafor package of R was used to synthesize the relations reported in the 64 studies and run the moderator analyses.

Results:
Morphological awareness was, on average, moderately related to all the language and literacy skills above – phonological awareness (r = .32), orthographic awareness (r = .38), vocabulary (r = .48), word reading/decoding, (r = .44), spelling (r = .49), text reading fluency (r = .67), and reading comprehension (r = .56). Moderator analyses showed that some relations varied by grade levels, orthographic depth, and type of morphological awareness (e.g., implicit vs explicit, inflectional vs derivational). L1/L2 status did not significantly moderate the relation of morphological awareness to any language and literacy skills.

Conclusion:
These results reveal the importance of morphological awareness in multiple language and literacy skills. Furthermore, moderator analyses indicate that the relations vary as a function of multiple factors. For example, for phonological awareness, vocabulary, and spelling, their relation with morphological awareness was stronger for explicit morphological awareness than that for implicit morphological awareness.

Authors

• Joong won Lee, University of California Irvine

• Alissa Patricia Wolters, University of California - Irvine

• Young-Suk Kim, University of California - Irvine