Table 1
Summary of Subjective (self-rated) Measures of Participants’ Proficiency in French.
| MEAN | SD | RANGE | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age of Acquisition | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0–0 |
| Self-rated proficiency(0–10)* | |||
| Speaking | 9.33 | 0.790 | 7–10 |
| Understanding | 9.61 | 0.576 | 8–10 |
| Writing | 8.93 | 0.998 | 7–10 |
| Reading | 9.50 | 0.753 | 8–10 |
[i] Note: Some participants had low to intermediate knowledge of English. However, none of them was fully proficient in English or any other language.
Table 2
Two Sets of Novel Words Used in the Experiment.
| SET | CONSISTENT | INCONSISTENT PREFERRED | INCONSISTENT UNPREFERRED |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | /bemanə/ | /ʒinavə/ | /ʒitymə/ |
| /danyvə/ | /ʒebinə/ | /ʒevabə/ | |
| /tunavə/ | /sedunə/ | /semivə/ | |
| /mabynə/ | /simybə/ | /sibavə/ | |
| /nypinə/ | /fapyvə/ | /fanynə/ | |
| /vetagə/ | /fedinə/ | /fenɔgə/ | |
| /pivadə/ | /kityvə/ | /kidunə/ | |
| /lybavə/ | /kemagə/ | /kepydə/ | |
| B | /badivə/ | /ʒimunə/ | /ʒitɔgə/ |
| /devabə/ | /ʒedavə/ | /ʒenyvə/ | |
| /mevinə/ | /sitavə/ | /sidynə/ | |
| /nemunə/ | /sepidə/ | /sebavə/ | |
| /tabynə/ | /fabɔgə/ | /fapunə/ | |
| /pinagə/ | /fenybə/ | /febadə/ | |
| /lapyvə/ | /kipynə/ | /kimavə/ | |
| /vinyvə/ | /kenivə/ | /kepanə/ |
[i] Note: Words from the inconsistent preferred group were later shown in each participant’s preferred spelling while words from the inconsistent unpreferred group were presented in participants’ unpreferred spelling.
Figure 1
An example object from each set (Set A and Set B) and word group (consistent, inconsistent preferred, and inconsistent unpreferred).
Figure 2
Structure of the phonological training (on the left) and the self-paced reading task (on the right).
Table 3
Sentences from the self-paced reading task and their English translations.
| FRENCH SENTENCES | ENGLISH SENTENCES |
|---|---|
| Ce xxx est petit | This xxx is small |
| Ce grand xxx est joli | This big xxx is pretty |
| Ceci est un xxx gigantesque | This is one big xxx |
| Ceci est un petit xxx magnifique | This is one small magnificent xxx |
| Cet objet est un xxx minuscule | This object is one very small xxx |
| Cet objet est un petit xxx magnifique | This object is one small magnificent xxx |
| Ce grand objet est un xxx magnifique | This big object is a magnificent xxx |
| Ce grand objet est un magnifique xxx | This big object is one magnificent xxx |
[i] Note: Bold exes represent the place where target words appeared. Due to syntactic differences across languages, the position of the target word differs between French sentences and their English translations.
* French sentences were matched with Spanish sentences used in Jevtović et al. (2022) study on the length as well as the place where the target word appeared.
Table 4
Mean Percentage of Accuracy (SDs) per Training Block and in the Final Check Phase.
| BLOCK1 | BLOCK2 | BLOCK3 | BLOCK4 | FINAL CHECK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Set A | 95.8 (4.64) | 96.9 (2.49) | 97.1 (4.29) | 95.6 (4.61) | 93 (7.08) |
| Set B | 96.4 (4.55) | 98.1 (3.19) | 95.5 (7.35) | 95.5 (5.69) | 93.8 (6.37) |
Table 5
Fixed and Random Effects Structure of the Overall Model.
| FIXED EFFECTS | β | SE | t VALUE | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 6.12 | 0.068 | 90 | 0.00*** |
| Training | 0.044 | 0.020 | 2.24 | 0.031* |
| ConsistentVsPreferred | 0.002 | 0.027 | 0.082 | 0.935 |
| ConsistentVsUnpreferred | 0.035 | 0.028 | 1.22 | 0.227 |
| Set | 0.211 | 0.135 | 1.56 | 0.125 |
| Training: ConsistentVsPreferred | –0.034 | 0.037 | –0.917 | 0.364 |
| Training: ConsistentVsUnpreferred | –0.077 | 0.037 | –2.05 | 0.046* |
| RANDOM EFFECTS | VARIANCE | STD.DEV. | ||
| Item: (Intercept) | 0.003 | 0.059 | ||
| Item: Training (slope) | 0.002 | 0.044 | ||
| Participant: (Intercept) | 0.206 | 0.453 | ||
| Participant: Training (slope) | 0.007 | 0.086 | ||
| Participant: ConsistentVsUnpreferred (slope) | 0.004 | 0.059 | ||
[i] Note: Asterisk denotes statistical significance: ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.
* The exact structure of the model was the following: logRT~1+Training* ConsistentVsPreferred + Training* Consistent Vs Unpreferred + Set + (1+Training+ ConsistentVsUnpreferred ||participant) + (1+Training ||item).
Figure 3
RTs from the self-paced reading task per group of words.
Note: Consistent words are shown in green, inconsistent preferred in blue, and inconsistent unpreferred in red. Trained words are presented on the left and untrained on the right. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean (SEM).
Figure 4
Visual representation of the interaction between PSTM and OSE.
Note: The relationship between the OSE and novel word recall (Inverse ALINE similarity score) modulated by PSTM capacity. The graph shows that, as PSTM score increases, the positive link between OSE and word recall increases. Both predictors (PSTM and OSE) are represented as z-scores.
Figure 5
The pattern of results observed in Spanish (left) and French readers (right).
Note: In both graphs the first bar in each training group represents consistent words, the second one inconsistent preferred and the third one represents inconsistent unpreferred words.
* Spanish data used to create the figure were obtained from https://osf.io/h69dg/.