See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/302354326

Substitution Errors in Learning

Chapter · January 2012

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_350

CITATIONS READS

0 173

1 author:

Flávia Heloísa Dos Santos

University College Dublin
122 PUBLICATIONS   535 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

working memory processess and interactions View project

Musical Training Program to Improve Mathematics and Cognitive Competences in Children with and without Learning Difficulties: A Neurocognitive Approach View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Flávia Heloísa Dos Santos on 22 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Metadata of the chapter that will be visualized online

Chapter Title Substitution Errors in Learning

Copyright Year 2011
Copyright Holder Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
Corresponding Author Family Name Santos
Particle
Given Name F. H.
Suffix
Division/Department Department of Experimental Psychology
Organization/University UNESP, São Paulo State University
Street Avenida Dom Antônio 2100
City Assis
State São Paulo
Postcode 19806-900
Country Brazil
Phone 55 18 33025902
Fax 55 18 33025804
Email flaviahs@assis.unesp.br
Comp. by: KVijayakumar Stage: Revises1 Chapter No.: 350 Title Name: ESL
Page Number: 0 Date:28/7/11 Time:13:28:42

1 S
prosody) of the language determine the characterization 39
2 Substitution Errors in Learning of the substitution errors. For instance, in English non- 40

words the substitution errors mainly occur by the end of 41

3 F. H. SANTOS the stimuli, while in Portuguese it might happen in both, 42
4 Department of Experimental Psychology, UNESP, by the middle and at the end of the nonwords. These 43
5 São Paulo State University, Assis, São Paulo, Brazil differences may be discussed in terms of distinctiveness, 44

clustering, and redintegration hypothesis. Therefore, it 45

is important to obtain specific stimuli for each idiom 46

6 Synonyms (Santos et al. 2006; Santos and Bueno 2003). 47
7 Error of substitution Age effect. The number of phoneme substitution errors 48

decrease in older children, despite the fact that the system 49

8 Definition capacity remains relatively stable during the development. 50
9 Substitution error is the automatic replacement of one However, the schooling effect could be a better determi- 51
10 item in a sentence, strategy, word, or phoneme when the nant of the performance since the phonological awareness 52
11 specific information is forgotten or unknown. For improves with the literacy proficiency. 53
12 instance, when the subject is requested to repeat nonwords Length effect. The length effect reflects the subvocal 54
13 immediately after listening to them, he/she might produce rehearsal component of the phonological working mem- 55
14 “zama” after hearing the nonword “jama.” In this example, ory. Thus, more phoneme substitution errors are observed 56
15 the substitution of the phoneme [j] occurred for the sound in long over short items. This effect is also observed for 57
16 of [z]. Chinese logographemes writing. 58
Wordlikeness effect. The rate of wordlikeness between 59
17 Theoretical Background nonword and general words affects the performance in the 60
18 In Cognitive Psychology, the term is mostly used to nonword repetition task; there is a progressive increase of 61
19 explain errors that occurred on the performance of para- the substitution error rates from nonwords with high to 62
20 digms, tests, and tasks related to language, memory, atten- low similarity with words. 63
21 tion, calculation, and executive functions. Therefore, Position effect. The pattern of errors in nonword repe- 64
22 substitution error is a general concept in cognition tition depends on the phonotactic rules of the language. 65
23 science. For instance, in Portuguese 5-syllable-pseudoword errors 66
24 In memory research, substitution errors tap on the occur mainly in the middle of the stimuli (third syllable), 67
25 interaction between linguistic and memory fields before the syllabic stress. However, substitution errors also 68
26 (Gathercole et al. 1994). It is well established that in the appear more in the end of stimuli (fifth syllable), after the 69
27 memory test for nonwords, a short-term memory skill stress. In certain circumstances, positional errors result 70
28 measured by instruments such as CNRep or BCPR, from impairment to an abstract ordinal code with graded 71
29 children with typical development will produce a small activation of letter positions from first to last, and this 72
30 percentage of errors, whereas children with specific lan- code is specific to tasks involving orthographic 73
31 guage impairment will perform significantly poorly than representations. 74
32 their counterparts in this task. Phonemic errors (when the Substitution errors can also be investigated by the 75
33 identity of the target item is not present in any position in context of long-term memory (prospective, gist, and epi- 76
34 the repetition) are classified as substitution, omission, and sodic memory) using recognition tasks, remembering/ 77
35 addition while order errors (refer to the movement of the knowing paradigms, measures of everyday functioning, 78
36 target to nontarget position in the output attempt) are and cue detection focused mainly on semantic substitu- 79
37 classified as migration. However, the phonotastic rules tion errors. 80
38 (syllabic stress, length, spelling, syllabic construction,

Norbert Seel (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6,

# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011
Comp. by: KVijayakumar Stage: Revises1 Chapter No.: 350 Title Name: ESL
Page Number: 0 Date:28/7/11 Time:13:28:43

2 S Substitution Errors in Learning

81 In language research, the term “substitution errors” is errors were reported in a variety of subject studies: animal 106

82 used to describe the pattern of errors production observed response in discrimination or problem solving tasks 107

83 in patients with aphasia, dyslexia, dyspraxia and children (pigeons, rats, monkeys), gender differences in attention, 108

84 with specific language impairment dueling with reading, memory or executive function tasks, children or adults’ 109

85 comprehension, writing, and repetition tasks. In general, speech production or reading, cognitive performance of 110

86 the pattern of errors is similar to controls but the quantity brain-damaged people, psychoactive drug effects, people 111

87 of error is higher in people with language impairments. with dyslexia, apraxia of speech, dyspraxia and aphasia, 112
88 Substitution errors in language studies may be associated and mental disorders (dementia, depression, melancholia, 113

89 with the use of the third person singular pronouns, schizoaffective disorder, and schizophrenia). 114

90 anomia, semantic substitution errors (say “arm” when

91 “leg” is intended), semantic verbs substitution, and sub- Cross-References 115

92 stitution of an orthographically similar word with letters ▶ Phonological Awareness 116

93 that overlap the target either in early or late letter posi- ▶ Phonological Working Memory 117

94 tions. In the language field, substitution errors are inves- ▶ Semantic Substitution Errors 118

95 tigated mostly in lexical decision, reading, writing, speech

96 production, and comprehension tasks. References 119

Gathercole, S. E., Willis, C. S., Baddeley, A. D., & Emslie, H. (1994). The 120

97 Important Scientific Research and Open children’s test of nonword repetition: a test of phonological working 121
memory. Memory, 2, 103–127. 122
98 Questions
Santos, F. H., & Bueno, O. F. (2003). Validation of the Brazilian Children’s 123
99 A search accomplished on March 14, 2010, at medline/ Test of Pseudoword Repetition in Portuguese speakers aged 4 to 10 124
100 pubmed using the words “substitution and errors and years. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 125
101 learning” found 56 articles. After reading their abstracts, 36(11),1533–1547. 126

102 only 42 were kept on the list considering the specific Santos, F. H., Bueno, O. F. A., & Gathercole, S. E. (2006). Errors in 127
nonword repetition: bridging short- and long-term memory. 128
103 subject because in the other studies the word “substitu-
Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 39, 371–385. 129
104 tion” was not used as an error type. The period related to
105 these papers ranged from 1976 to 2009. Substitution

View publication stats