The Contributions of Short-Term Memory to Writing at the Sublexical, Lexical, and Discourse Level in Beginning Writers

ABSTRACT

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine the direct and indirect relations between short-term memory (STM), reading, oral language, and writing at the letter, word, and discourse levels in young, developing writers both cross-sectionally and longitudinally.

Method

Participants were 449 English-speaking kindergarten students (52% female) from 41 schools in the U.S.

Results

The cross-sectional analysis indicated that STM was directly related to oral language (β = 0.62), letter naming fluency (β = 0.43), word reading (β = 0.54), and reading comprehension (β = 0.42), all of which were statistically significant. Results supported a complete mediation model with STM having an indirect effect on writing via reading and oral language. In the cross-sectional analysis, the total effects of STM on handwriting (β = 0.51), spelling (β = 0.57), and written composition (β = 0.47) were substantial and statistically significant. In the longitudinal analysis, the total effects of Fall STM on Spring writing outcomes, handwriting (β = 0.42), spelling (β = 0.70), and written composition (β = 0.44) were also substantial and statistically significant.

Conclusion

Findings confirm that STM is a foundational cognitive skill necessary for early writing; however, they provide a more nuanced understanding by showing that the contribution of STM is indirect through reading and oral language. Writing is complex, requiring interaction among higher-order domain-specific and domain-general components. Along with other recent studies, our findings highlight the need to examine the direct and indirect effects for a more precise understanding of skills that support writing development.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A160253 awarded to University of Cincinnati. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2024.2365698

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences [R305A160253].