@article{FitjarRonnebergNottbuschetal.2021, author = {Fitjar, Camilla L. and R{\o}nneberg, Vibeke and Nottbusch, Guido and Torrance, Mark}, title = {Learning handwriting}, series = {Frontiers in psychology / Frontiers Research Foundation}, volume = {12}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology / Frontiers Research Foundation}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2021.663829}, pages = {13}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Skilled handwriting of single letters is associated not only with a neat final product but also with fluent pen-movement, characterized by a smooth pen-tip velocity profile. Our study explored fluency when writing single letters in children who were just beginning to learn to handwrite, and the extent to which this was predicted by the children's pen-control ability and by their letter knowledge. 176 Norwegian children formed letters by copying and from dictation (i.e., in response to hearing letter sounds). Performance on these tasks was assessed in terms of the counts of velocity inversions as the children produced sub-letter features that would be produced by competent handwriters as a single, smooth (ballistic) action. We found that there was considerable variation in these measures across writers, even when producing well-formed letters. Children also copied unfamiliar symbols, completed various pen-control tasks (drawing lines, circles, garlands, and figure eights), and tasks that assessed knowledge of letter sounds and shapes. After controlling for pen-control ability, pen-movement fluency was affected by letter knowledge (specifically children's performance on a task that required selecting graphemes on the basis of their sound). This was the case when children retrieved letter forms from dictated letter sounds, but also when directly copying letters and, unexpectedly, when copying unfamiliar symbols. These findings suggest that familiarity with a letter affects movement fluency during letter production but may also point towards a more general ability to process new letter-like symbols in children with good letter knowledge.}, language = {en} } @misc{PaulyNottbusch2020, author = {Pauly, Dennis Nikolas and Nottbusch, Guido}, title = {The Influence of the German Capitalization Rules on Reading}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {622}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-46085}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-460857}, pages = {17}, year = {2020}, abstract = {German orthography systematically marks all nouns (even other nominalized word classes) by capitalizing their first letter. It is often claimed that readers benefit from the uppercase-letter syntactic and semantic information, which makes the processing of sentences easier (e.g., Bock et al., 1985, 1989). In order to test this hypothesis, we asked 54 German readers to read single sentences systematically manipulated by a target word (N). In the experimental condition (EXP), we used semantic priming (in the following example: sick → cold) in order to build up a strong expectation of a noun, which was actually an attribute for the following noun (N+1) (translated to English e.g., "The sick writer had a cold (N) nose (N+1) …"). The sentences in the control condition were built analogously, but word N was purposefully altered (keeping word length and frequency constant) to make its interpretation as a noun extremely unlikely (e.g., "The sick writer had a blue (N) nose (N+1) …"). In both conditions, the sentences were presented either following German standard orthography (Cap) or in lowercase spelling (NoCap). The capitalized nouns in the EXP/Cap condition should then prevent garden-path parsing, as capital letters can be recognized parafoveally. However, in the EXP/NoCap condition, we expected a garden-path effect on word N+1 affecting first-pass fixations and the number of regressions, as the reader realizes that word N is instead an adjective. As the control condition does not include a garden-path, we expected to find (small) effects of the violation of the orthographic rule in the CON/NoCap condition, but no garden-path effect. As a global result, it can be stated that reading sentences in which nouns are not marked by a majuscule slows a native German reader down significantly, but from an absolute point of view, the effect is small. Compared with other manipulations (e.g., transpositions or substitutions), a lowercase letter still represents the correct allograph in the correct position without affecting phonology. Furthermore, most German readers do have experience with other alphabetic writing systems that lack consistent noun capitalization, and in (private) digital communication lowercase nouns are quite common. Although our garden-path sentences did not show the desired effect, we found an indication of grammatical pre-processing enabled by the majuscule in the regularly spelled sentences: In the case of high noun frequency, we post hoc located parafovea-on-fovea effects, i.e., longer fixation durations, on the attributive adjective (word N). These benefits of capitalization could only be detected under specific circumstances. In other cases, we conclude that longer reading durations are mainly the result of disturbance in readers' habituation when the expected capitalization is missing.}, language = {en} } @article{PaulyNottbusch2020, author = {Pauly, Dennis Nikolas and Nottbusch, Guido}, title = {The Influence of the German Capitalization Rules on Reading}, series = {Frontiers in Communication}, volume = {5}, journal = {Frontiers in Communication}, publisher = {Frontiers Media}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {2297-900X}, doi = {10.3389/fcomm.2020.00015}, pages = {15}, year = {2020}, abstract = {German orthography systematically marks all nouns (even other nominalized word classes) by capitalizing their first letter. It is often claimed that readers benefit from the uppercase-letter syntactic and semantic information, which makes the processing of sentences easier (e.g., Bock et al., 1985, 1989). In order to test this hypothesis, we asked 54 German readers to read single sentences systematically manipulated by a target word (N). In the experimental condition (EXP), we used semantic priming (in the following example: sick -> cold) in order to build up a strong expectation of a noun, which was actually an attribute for the following noun (N+1) (translated to English e.g., "The sick writer had a cold (N) nose (N+1) ..."). The sentences in the control condition were built analogously, but word N was purposefully altered (keeping word length and frequency constant) to make its interpretation as a noun extremely unlikely (e.g., "The sick writer had a blue (N) nose (N+1) ..."). In both conditions, the sentences were presented either following German standard orthography (Cap) or in lowercase spelling (NoCap). The capitalized nouns in the EXP/Cap condition should then prevent garden-path parsing, as capital letters can be recognized parafoveally. However, in the EXP/NoCap condition, we expected a garden-path effect on word N+1 affecting first-pass fixations and the number of regressions, as the reader realizes that word N is instead an adjective. As the control condition does not include a garden-path, we expected to find (small) effects of the violation of the orthographic rule in the CON/NoCap condition, but no garden-path effect. As a global result, it can be stated that reading sentences in which nouns are not marked by a majuscule slows a native German reader down significantly, but from an absolute point of view, the effect is small. Compared with other manipulations (e.g., transpositions or substitutions), a lowercase letter still represents the correct allograph in the correct position without affecting phonology. Furthermore, most German readers do have experience with other alphabetic writing systems that lack consistent noun capitalization, and in (private) digital communication lowercase nouns are quite common. Although our garden-path sentences did not show the desired effect, we found an indication of grammatical pre-processing enabled by the majuscule in the regularly spelled sentences: In the case of high noun frequency, we post hoc located parafovea-on-fovea effects, i.e., longer fixation durations, on the attributive adjective (word N). These benefits of capitalization could only be detected under specific circumstances. In other cases, we conclude that longer reading durations are mainly the result of disturbance in readers' habituation when the expected capitalization is missing.}, language = {en} } @article{PaulyNottbusch2020, author = {Pauly, Dennis Nikolas and Nottbusch, Guido}, title = {The Influence of the German Capitalization Rules on Reading}, series = {Frontiers in Communication}, volume = {5}, journal = {Frontiers in Communication}, publisher = {Frontiers Media}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {2297-900X}, doi = {10.3389/fcomm.2020.00015}, pages = {15}, year = {2020}, abstract = {German orthography systematically marks all nouns (even other nominalized word classes) by capitalizing their first letter. It is often claimed that readers benefit from the uppercase-letter syntactic and semantic information, which makes the processing of sentences easier (e.g., Bock et al., 1985, 1989). In order to test this hypothesis, we asked 54 German readers to read single sentences systematically manipulated by a target word (N). In the experimental condition (EXP), we used semantic priming (in the following example: sick → cold) in order to build up a strong expectation of a noun, which was actually an attribute for the following noun (N+1) (translated to English e.g., "The sick writer had a cold (N) nose (N+1) …"). The sentences in the control condition were built analogously, but word N was purposefully altered (keeping word length and frequency constant) to make its interpretation as a noun extremely unlikely (e.g., "The sick writer had a blue (N) nose (N+1) …"). In both conditions, the sentences were presented either following German standard orthography (Cap) or in lowercase spelling (NoCap). The capitalized nouns in the EXP/Cap condition should then prevent garden-path parsing, as capital letters can be recognized parafoveally. However, in the EXP/NoCap condition, we expected a garden-path effect on word N+1 affecting first-pass fixations and the number of regressions, as the reader realizes that word N is instead an adjective. As the control condition does not include a garden-path, we expected to find (small) effects of the violation of the orthographic rule in the CON/NoCap condition, but no garden-path effect. As a global result, it can be stated that reading sentences in which nouns are not marked by a majuscule slows a native German reader down significantly, but from an absolute point of view, the effect is small. Compared with other manipulations (e.g., transpositions or substitutions), a lowercase letter still represents the correct allograph in the correct position without affecting phonology. Furthermore, most German readers do have experience with other alphabetic writing systems that lack consistent noun capitalization, and in (private) digital communication lowercase nouns are quite common. Although our garden-path sentences did not show the desired effect, we found an indication of grammatical pre-processing enabled by the majuscule in the regularly spelled sentences: In the case of high noun frequency, we post hoc located parafovea-on-fovea effects, i.e., longer fixation durations, on the attributive adjective (word N). These benefits of capitalization could only be detected under specific circumstances. In other cases, we conclude that longer reading durations are mainly the result of disturbance in readers' habituation when the expected capitalization is missing.}, language = {en} } @article{LambrechtBogdaKochetal.2019, author = {Lambrecht, Jennifer and Bogda, Katja and Koch, Helvi and Nottbusch, Guido and Sp{\"o}rer, Nadine}, title = {L{\"a}ngsschnittliche Effekte der h{\"a}uslichen und institutionellen Lernumwelt auf den Wortschatz von Grundschulkindern - ein Vergleich}, series = {Journal for educational research online - JERO}, volume = {11}, journal = {Journal for educational research online - JERO}, number = {2}, publisher = {Waxmann}, address = {M{\"u}nster}, issn = {1866-6671}, pages = {86 -- 115}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Es wird angenommen, dass f{\"u}r den fr{\"u}hen Kompetenzerwerb eines Kindes neben dem famili{\"a}ren Hintergrund und Merkmalen des Kindes die Lernumgebungen eine wichtige Rolle spielen. Die vorliegende Studie verfolgte das Ziel, die Effekte der h{\"a}uslichen und der institutionellen Lernumgebung von Kindergartenkindern auf den fr{\"u}hen Wortschatzerwerb zu vergleichen und notwendige Bedingungen f{\"u}r einen kompensatorischen Effekt der institutionellen Lernumgebung zu {\"u}berpr{\"u}fen. Anhand l{\"a}ngsschnittlicher Daten von N = 557 Kindergartenkindern aus dem deutschen Nationalen Bildungspanel (NEPS) wurde untersucht, in welchem Ausmaß der famili{\"a}re Hintergrund und die Merkmale eines Kindes die h{\"a}usliche und institutionelle Lernumgebung pr{\"a}dizieren und in welchem Ausmaß diese wiederum den Wortschatz in der Vorschule und in der ersten Klasse vorhersagen. Um zu {\"u}berpr{\"u}fen, ob die beiden Lernumgebungen einen jeweils eigenst{\"a}ndigen Beitrag zur Pr{\"a}diktion des Wortschatzes leisten, wurden nahezu identische Indikatoren zur Operationalisierung verwendet. Mittels Strukturgleichungsmodellierung wurden die Effekte gesch{\"a}tzt. Die Studie zeigte, dass die h{\"a}usliche und institutionelle Lernumgebung eines Kindes kleine sowie voneinander abgrenzbare Effekte auf den Wortschatz hatten. Dabei war die h{\"a}usliche Lernumwelt st{\"a}rker mit dem famili{\"a}ren Hintergrund assoziiert, w{\"a}hrend die institutionelle Lernumgebung st{\"a}rker durch Merkmale des Kindes selbst pr{\"a}diziert wurde. Dies er{\"o}ffnet neue M{\"o}glichkeiten der Diskussion kompensatorischer Effekte.}, language = {en} } @article{LambrechtBogdaKochetal.2019, author = {Lambrecht, Jennifer and Bogda, Katja and Koch, Helvi and Nottbusch, Guido and Sp{\"o}rer, Nadine}, title = {Die Rolle der Kindergartenqualit{\"a}t}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Erziehungswissenschaft}, volume = {22}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Erziehungswissenschaft}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, issn = {1434-663X}, doi = {10.1007/s11618-019-00872-6}, pages = {665 -- 694}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Neben famili{\"a}ren Merkmalen hat sich die Kindergartenqualit{\"a}t als bedeutsam f{\"u}r den Wortschatz von Kindergartenkindern gezeigt. Die drei Dimensionen der Kindergartenqualit{\"a}t, die Struktur‑, Orientierungs- und Prozessqualit{\"a}t, wurden bisher jedoch nicht simultan und dom{\"a}nenspezifisch in Bezug auf den Wortschatz untersucht. In der vorliegenden Studie wird der Frage nachgegangen, wie die Dimensionen der Kindergartenqualit{\"a}t unter Ber{\"u}cksichtigung famili{\"a}rer Merkmale mit dem Wortschatz von Kindern auf Individual- und Kindergartenebene zusammenh{\"a}ngen. Die Datengrundlage bildete eine Teilstichprobe des nationalen Bildungspanels („National Educational Panel Study", NEPS) mit N = 1165 Kindern in 139 Kinderg{\"a}rten. Die durchgef{\"u}hrten Mehrebenenanalysen ergaben, dass zur Pr{\"a}diktion des Wortschatzes auf Individualebene die famili{\"a}ren Merkmale bedeutsam waren, w{\"a}hrend Unterschiede zwischen Kinderg{\"a}rten mittels der Kindergartenqualit{\"a}t erkl{\"a}rt werden konnten. Dabei waren alle drei Qualit{\"a}tsdimensionen relevant. Die Ergebnisse werden vor dem Hintergrund verschiedener Qualit{\"a}tskonzeptionen diskutiert.}, language = {de} } @article{TorranceNottbuschAlvesetal.2017, author = {Torrance, Mark and Nottbusch, Guido and Alves, Rui A. and Arfe, Barbara and Chanquoy, Lucile and Chukharev-Hudilainen, Evgeny and Dimakos, Ioannis and Fidalgo, Raquel and Hyona, Jukka and Johannesson, Omar I. and Madjarov, George and Pauly, Dennis Nikolas and Uppstad, Per Henning and van Waes, Luuk and Vernon, Michael and Wengelin, Asa}, title = {Timed written picture naming in 14 European languages}, series = {Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society}, volume = {50}, journal = {Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society}, number = {2}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York}, issn = {1554-351X}, doi = {10.3758/s13428-017-0902-x}, pages = {744 -- 758}, year = {2017}, abstract = {We describe the Multilanguage Written Picture Naming Dataset. This gives trial-level data and time and agreement norms for written naming of the 260 pictures of everyday objects that compose the colorized Snodgrass and Vanderwart picture set (Rossion \& Pourtois in Perception, 33, 217-236, 2004). Adult participants gave keyboarded responses in their first language under controlled experimental conditions (N = 1,274, with subsamples responding in Bulgarian, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Icelandic, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, and Swedish). We measured the time to initiate a response (RT) and interkeypress intervals, and calculated measures of name and spelling agreement. There was a tendency across all languages for quicker RTs to pictures with higher familiarity, image agreement, and name frequency, and with higher name agreement. Effects of spelling agreement and effects on output rates after writing onset were present in some, but not all, languages. Written naming therefore shows name retrieval effects that are similar to those found in speech, but our findings suggest the need for cross-language comparisons as we seek to understand the orthographic retrieval and/or assembly processes that are specific to written output.}, 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} } @misc{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?}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-100384}, 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{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} }