@article{GoekgoezGagarinaKlassert2020,
  author    = {G{\"o}kg{\"o}z, K{\"u}bra and Gagarina, Natalia and Klassert, Annegret},
  title     = {Kasuserwerb in der Erstsprache T{\"u}rkisch},
  series = {Sprache, Stimme, Geh{\"o}r : Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Kommunikationsst{\"o}rungen},
  volume    = {44},
  journal   = {Sprache, Stimme, Geh{\"o}r : Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Kommunikationsst{\"o}rungen},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Thieme},
  address   = {Stuttgart},
  issn      = {0342-0477},
  doi       = {10.1055/a-0641-4467},
  pages     = {49 -- 56},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {W{\"a}hrend f{\"u}r den monolingualen Erwerb des T{\"u}rkischen ausreichend Evidenzen vorliegen, dass Kasus innerhalb der ersten drei Lebensjahre erworben wird und Erwerbsprobleme ein sicherer Indikator f{\"u}r SSES sind, ist dies f{\"u}r den bilingualen Erwerb nicht ausreichend gekl{\"a}rt. Die vorliegende Studie untersucht in longitudinalen Daten von ungest{\"o}rten 18 zwei- bis vierj{\"a}hrigen bilingual t{\"u}rkisch-deutsch-sprachigen Kindern die Korrektheitswerte, Entwicklungsmuster und Fehlertypen in einem Elizitierungstest f{\"u}r Akkusativ und Dativ in der Erstsprache T{\"u}rkisch. Auch nach dem vierten Lebensjahr sind die getesteten Bereiche nicht von allen Kindern vollst{\"a}ndig erworben. Der Kasus ist demnach unter bilingualen Erwerbsbedingungen ein vulnerabler Bereich und als alleiniger Marker nicht geeignet, um zwischen gest{\"o}rter und ungest{\"o}rter bilingualer Sprachentwicklung zu unterscheiden. Das h{\"a}ufige Ausweichen auf pronominale Reaktionen und andere W{\"o}rter auf Grund lexikalischer Unsicherheiten, verdeutlicht die Notwendigkeit von erstsprachlichen Kompetenzen bei der Beurteilung der Korrektheit der Reaktionen.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{CzapkaWotschackKlassertetal.2020,
  author    = {Czapka, Sophia and Wotschack, Christiane and Klassert, Annegret and Festman, Julia},
  title     = {A path to the bilingual advantage},
  series = {Bilingualism : language and cognition},
  volume    = {23},
  journal   = {Bilingualism : language and cognition},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press},
  address   = {Cambridge},
  issn      = {1366-7289},
  doi       = {10.1017/S1366728919000166},
  pages     = {344 -- 354},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Matching participants (as suggested by Hope, 2015) may be one promising option for research on a potential bilingual advantage in executive functions (EF). In this study we first compared performances in three EF-tasks of a naturally heterogeneous sample of monolingual (n = 69, age = 9.0 y) and multilingual children (n = 57, age = 9.3 y). Secondly, we meticulously matched participants pairwise to obtain two highly homogeneous groups to rerun our analysis and investigate a potential bilingual advantage. The initally disadvantaged multilinguals (regarding socioeconomic status and German lexicon size) performed worse in updating and response inhibition, but similarly in interference inhibition. This indicates that superior EF compensate for the detrimental effects of the background variables. After matching children pairwise on age, gender, intelligence, socioeconomic status and German lexicon size, performances became similar except for interference inhibition. Here, an advantage for multilinguals in the form of globally reduced reaction times emerged, indicating a bilingual executive processing advantage.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GerthKlassertDolketal.2016,
  author    = {Gerth, Sabrina and Klassert, Annegret and Dolk, Thomas and Fliesser, Michael and Fischer, Martin H. and Nottbusch, Guido and Festman, Julia},
  title     = {Is Handwriting Performance Affected by the Writing Surface?},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01308},
  pages     = {18},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Due to their multifunctionality, tablets offer tremendous advantages for research on handwriting dynamics or for interactive use of learning apps in schools. Further, the widespread use of tablet computers has had a great impact on handwriting in the current generation. But, is it advisable to teach how to write and to assess handwriting in pre- and primary schoolchildren on tablets rather than on paper? Since handwriting is not automatized before the age of 10 years, children's handwriting movements require graphomotor and visual feedback as well as permanent control of movement execution during handwriting. Modifications in writing conditions, for instance the smoother writing surface of a tablet, might influence handwriting performance in general and in particular those of non-automatized beginning writers. In order to investigate how handwriting performance is affected by a difference in friction of the writing surface, we recruited three groups with varying levels of handwriting automaticity: 25 preschoolers, 27 second graders, and 25 adults. We administered three tasks measuring graphomotor abilities, visuomotor abilities, and handwriting performance (only second graders and adults). We evaluated two aspects of handwriting performance: the handwriting quality with a visual score and the handwriting dynamics using online handwriting measures [e.g., writing duration, writing velocity, strokes and number of inversions in velocity (NIV)]. In particular, NIVs which describe the number of velocity peaks during handwriting are directly related to the level of handwriting automaticity. In general, we found differences between writing on paper compared to the tablet. These differences were partly task-dependent. The comparison between tablet and paper revealed a faster writing velocity for all groups and all tasks on the tablet which indicates that all participants—even the experienced writers—were influenced by the lower friction of the tablet surface. Our results for the group-comparison show advancing levels in handwriting automaticity from preschoolers to second graders to adults, which confirms that our method depicts handwriting performance in groups with varying degrees of handwriting automaticity. We conclude that the smoother tablet surface requires additional control of handwriting movements and therefore might present an additional challenge for learners of handwriting.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KlassertBormannFestmanetal.2018,
  author    = {Klassert, Annegret and Bormann, Sarah and Festman, Julia and Gerth, Sabrina},
  title     = {Primary School Children's Spelling of Consonant Clusters and Morphological Awareness},
  series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Entwicklungspsychologie und p{\"a}dagogische Psychologie},
  volume    = {50},
  journal   = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Entwicklungspsychologie und p{\"a}dagogische Psychologie},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Hogrefe},
  address   = {G{\"o}ttingen},
  issn      = {0049-8637},
  doi       = {10.1026/0049-8637/a000193},
  pages     = {115 -- 125},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Die vorliegenden Studien untersuchen die Entwicklung der Rechtschreibf{\"a}higkeit f{\"u}r finale Konsonantencluster im Deutschen und die ihr zugrundeliegenden Strategien bei Erst- bis Drittkl{\"a}ssler_innen (N = 209). Dazu wurde der Einfluss der morphologischen Komplexit{\"a}t (poly- vs. monomorphematische Cluster) auf die Rechtschreibung qualitativ und quantitativ analysiert, sowie mit einer Messung zur morphologischen Bewusstheit korreliert. Von der ersten Klasse an zeigt sich eine hohe Korrektheit in der Schreibung und somit eine sprachspezifisch schnelle Entwicklung der alphabetischen Rechtschreibstrategie f{\"u}r finale Konsonantencluster. Der Einfluss morphologischer Verarbeitungsprozesse wurde allerdings erst f{\"u}r die Drittkl{\"a}ssler_innen gefunden. Obwohl bereits die Erstkl{\"a}ssler_innen gut entwickelte morphologische Bewusstheit zeigten, scheinen sie noch nicht in der Lage zu sein, diese bei der Rechtschreibung anzuwenden. Die Ergebnisse werden im Kontrast zu den umfangreicher vorliegenden Befunden f{\"u}r die englische Sprache diskutiert.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{CzapkaKlassertFestman2019,
  author    = {Czapka, Sophia and Klassert, Annegret and Festman, Julia},
  title     = {Executive functions and language},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00097},
  pages     = {18},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {We aimed at unveiling the role of executive functions (EFs) and language-related skills in spelling for mono- versus multilingual primary school children. We focused on EF and language-related skills, in particular lexicon size and phonological awareness (PA), because these factors were found to predict spelling in studies predominantly conducted with monolinguals, and because multilingualism can modulate these factors. There is evidence for (a) a bilingual advantage in EF due to constant high cognitive demands through language control, (b) a smaller mental lexicon in German and (c) possibly better PA. Multilinguals in Germany show on average poorer German language proficiency, what can influence performance on language-based tasks negatively. Thus, we included two spelling tasks to tease apart spelling based on lexical knowledge (i.e., word spelling) from spelling based on non-lexical strategies (i.e., non-word spelling). Our sample consisted of heterogeneous third graders from Germany: 69 monolinguals (age: M = 108 months) and 57 multilinguals (age: M = 111 months). On less language-dependent tasks (e.g., non-word spelling, PA, intelligence, short-term memory (STM) and three EF tasks testing switching, inhibition, and working memory) performance of both groups did not differ significantly. However, multilinguals performed significantly more poorly on tasks measuring German lexicon size and word spelling than monolinguals. Regression analyses revealed that for multilinguals, inhibition was related to spelling, whereas switching was the only EF component to influence word spelling in monolinguals and non-word spelling performance in both groups. By adding lexicon size and other language-related factors to the regression models, the influence of switching was reduced to insignificant effects, but inhibition remained significant for multilinguals. Language-related skills best predicted spelling and both language groups shared those variables: PA for word spelling, and STM for non-word spelling. Additionally, multilinguals' word spelling performance was also predicted by their German lexicon size, and non-word spelling performance by PA. This study offers an in-depth look at spelling acquisition at a certain point of literacy development. Mono- and multilinguals have the predominant factors for spelling in common, but probably due to superior language knowledge, monolinguals were already able to make use of EF during spelling. For multilinguals, German lexicon size was more important for spelling than EF. For multilinguals' spelling these functions might come into play only at a later stage.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KlassertGagarinaKauschke2014,
  author    = {Klassert, Annegret and Gagarina, Natalʹja Vladimirovna and Kauschke, Christina},
  title     = {Object and action naming in Russian- and German- speaking monolingual and bilingual children*},
  series = {Bilingualism : language and cognition.},
  volume    = {17},
  journal   = {Bilingualism : language and cognition.},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {1366-7289},
  doi       = {10.1017/S1366728913000096},
  pages     = {73 -- 88},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {The present study investigates the influence of word category on naming performance in two populations: bilingual and monolingual children. The question is whether and, if so, to what extent monolingual and bilingual children differ with respect to noun and verb naming and whether a noun bias exists in the lexical abilities of bilingual children. Picture naming of objects and actions by Russian-German bilingual children (aged 4-7 years) was compared to age-matched monolingual children. The results clearly demonstrate a naming deficit of bilingual children in comparison to monolingual children that increases with age. Noun learning is more fragile in bilingual contexts than is verb learning. In bilingual language acquisition, nouns do not predominate over verbs as much as is seen in monolingual German and Russian children. The results are discussed with respect to semantic-conceptual aspects and language-specific features of nouns and verbs, and the impact of input on the acquisition of these word categories.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{CzapkaKlassertFestman2019,
  author    = {Czapka, Sophia and Klassert, Annegret and Festman, Julia},
  title     = {Executive Functions and Language},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00097},
  pages     = {18},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {We aimed at unveiling the role of executive functions (EFs) and language-related skills in spelling for mono- versus multilingual primary school children. We focused on EF and language-related skills, in particular lexicon size and phonological awareness (PA), because these factors were found to predict spelling in studies predominantly conducted with monolinguals, and because multilingualism can modulate these factors. There is evidence for (a) a bilingual advantage in EF due to constant high cognitive demands through language control, (b) a smaller mental lexicon in German and (c) possibly better PA. Multilinguals in Germany show on average poorer German language proficiency, what can influence performance on language-based tasks negatively. Thus, we included two spelling tasks to tease apart spelling based on lexical knowledge (i.e., word spelling) from spelling based on non-lexical strategies (i.e., non-word spelling). Our sample consisted of heterogeneous third graders from Germany: 69 monolinguals (age: M = 108 months) and 57 multilinguals (age: M = 111 months). On less language-dependent tasks (e.g., non-word spelling, PA, intelligence, short-term memory (STM) and three EF tasks testing switching, inhibition, and working memory) performance of both groups did not differ significantly. However, multilinguals performed significantly more poorly on tasks measuring German lexicon size and word spelling than monolinguals. Regression analyses revealed that for multilinguals, inhibition was related to spelling, whereas switching was the only EF component to influence word spelling in monolinguals and non-word spelling performance in both groups. By adding lexicon size and other language-related factors to the regression models, the influence of switching was reduced to insignificant effects, but inhibition remained significant for multilinguals. Language-related skills best predicted spelling and both language groups shared those variables: PA for word spelling, and STM for non-word spelling. Additionally, multilinguals' word spelling performance was also predicted by their German lexicon size, and non-word spelling performance by PA. This study offers an in-depth look at spelling acquisition at a certain point of literacy development. Mono- and multilinguals have the predominant factors for spelling in common, but probably due to superior language knowledge, monolinguals were already able to make use of EF during spelling. For multilinguals, German lexicon size was more important for spelling than EF. For multilinguals' spelling these functions might come into play only at a later stage.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GerthKlassertDolketal.2016,
  author    = {Gerth, Sabrina and Klassert, Annegret and Dolk, Thomas and Fliesser, Michael and Fischer, Martin H. and Nottbusch, Guido and Festman, Julia},
  title     = {Is Handwriting Performance Affected by the Writing Surface? Comparing Tablet vs. Paper},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01308},
  pages     = {18},
  year      = {2016},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GerthDolkKlassertetal.2016,
  author    = {Gerth, Sabrina and Dolk, Thomas and Klassert, Annegret and Fliesser, Michael and Fischer, Martin H. and Nottbusch, Guido and Festman, Julia},
  title     = {Adapting to the surface: A comparison of handwriting measures when writing on a tablet computer and on paper},
  series = {Human movement science : a journal devoted to pure and applied research on human movement},
  volume    = {48},
  journal   = {Human movement science : a journal devoted to pure and applied research on human movement},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0167-9457},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.humov.2016.04.006},
  pages     = {62 -- 73},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Our study addresses the following research questions: Are there differences between handwriting movements on paper and on a tablet computer? Can experienced writers, such as most adults, adapt their graphomotor execution during writing to a rather unfamiliar surface for instance a tablet computer? We examined the handwriting performance of adults in three tasks with different complexity: (a) graphomotor abilities, (b) visuomotor abilities and (c) handwriting. Each participant performed each task twice, once on paper and once on a tablet computer with a pen. We tested 25 participants by measuring their writing duration, in air time, number of pen lifts, writing velocity and number of inversions in velocity. The data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects modeling with repeated measures. Our results reveal differences between writing on paper and on a tablet computer which were partly task-dependent. Our findings also show that participants were able to adapt their graphomotor execution to the smoother surface of the tablet computer during the tasks. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}