Texting, textese and literacy abilities: a naturalistic study

In this study, we examined texting behaviours, text message characteristics (textese) of actual sent text messages and the relationships between texting, textese and literacy abilities in a sample of 183 American undergraduates. As compared to previous naturalistic and experimental studies with English-speaking adults, both texting frequency and textism density (proportion of textese) were greater, but category density analyses were similar to a recent experimental study with undergraduates. Interestingly, whilst overall textism density was negatively related to reading and spelling, some textism categories (e.g., omitted apostrophes) were negatively related to literacy skills, while others (e.g., accent stylisation) were positively related to literacy skills. The use of predictive texting was a moderator in this relationship. Our results may help explain the discordant findings between children and adults with regard to textese use and literacy skills, and also highlight the importance of conducting analyses of category density and predictive texting in studies of texting and literacy.

[1]  Daisy Powell,et al.  Does SMS text messaging help or harm adults' knowledge of standard spelling? , 2011, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[2]  C. Wood,et al.  Exploring the relationship between children's knowledge of text message abbreviations and school literacy outcomes. , 2009, The British journal of developmental psychology.

[3]  Nenagh Kemp,et al.  Texting versus txtng: reading and writing text messages, and links with other linguistic skills , 2010 .

[4]  V. Carrington.  Texts and literacies of the Shi Jinrui , 2004 .

[5]  Carolyn L. Carlson,et al.  An Exploratory Investigation into the Relationship between Text Messaging and Spelling , 2007 .

[6]  Crispin Thurlow,et al.  From Statistical Panic to Moral Panic: The Metadiscursive Construction and Popular Exaggeration of New Media Language in the Print Media , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[8]  Trudy E. Kwong,et al.  lol: new language and spelling in instant messaging , 2010 .

[9]  Michelle Drouin,et al.  College students' text messaging, use of textese and literacy skills , 2011, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[10]  K. Cain,et al.  What we have learned from ‘learning to read in more than one language’ , 2011 .

[11]  Kevin Durkin,et al.  Txt lang: Texting, textism use and literacy abilities in adolescents with and without specific language impairment , 2011, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[12]  Clare Wood,et al.  Txt msg n school literacy: does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children's literacy attainment? , 2008 .

[13]  Naomi S. Baron,et al.  Text Messaging and IM , 2007 .

[14]  Clare Wood,et al.  The effect of text messaging on 9- and 10-year-old children's reading, spelling and phonological processing skills , 2011, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[15]  Michelle Drouin,et al.  R u txting? Is the Use of Text Speak Hurting Your Literacy? , 2009 .

[16]  S. Tagliamonte,et al.  LINGUISTIC RUIN? LOL! INSTANT MESSAGING AND TEEN LANGUAGE , 2008 .

[17]  Larry D. Rosen,et al.  The Relationship Between “Textisms” and Formal and Informal Writing Among Young Adults , 2010, Commun. Res..

[18]  Clare Wood,et al.  A longitudinal study of children's text messaging and literacy development. , 2011, British journal of psychology.

[19]  J. E. L. Coe,et al.  'txtN is ez f u no h2 rd': the relation between reading ability and text-messaging behaviour , 2011, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[20]  Nenagh Kemp,et al.  Text-message abbreviations and language skills in high school and university students , 2012 .

[21]  Nenagh Kemp,et al.  Children's text messaging: abbreviations, input methods and links with literacy , 2011, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..