Skip to main content

Arabic psycholinguistic screening tool: a preliminary study




Psycholinguistics or the psychology of language refers to the study of the psychological and neurobiological factors that enable humans to acquire, use, and understand language.


This work aimed at designing and applying an Arabic Psycholinguistic Screening Tool on a group of native Egyptian students aged 7 through 9, 11 years old, enrolled in primary grade 1 through primary grade 4, and analyzing the obtained results in order to attain a better understanding of psycholinguistic skills in the studied age range and preliminarily study the constituent items of the tool.

Participants and methods

The sample in this study included 45 healthy native Arabic-speaking Egyptian children: 25 boys and 20 girls. The groups were as follows: group I (from 7 to 7; 11 years old), group II (from 8 to 8; 11 years old), and group III (from 9 to 9; 11 years old). They were attending regular classes in schools following the Egyptian Arabic National curriculum. The participants were enrolled in primary grade 1 through primary grade 4. Children were randomly selected from a cluster of children reported to be subjectively free from any hearing difficulties, delayed language development, medical problems, and intellectual, social, psychiatric, psychological, or serious academic difficulties. Psycholinguistic abilities for each child were evaluated using the Arabic Psycholinguistic Screening Tool designed in the current study. Tested parameters included oral similarity, morphological closure, proper word and nonsense word repetition, phonological deletion, phonological rhyming awareness and production, spoken and written vocabulary, sequencing events, sight and sound decoding, in addition to sight and sound spelling. The results obtained were then analyzed using descriptive, comparative, correlation, reliability, and validity studies.


The results reflected internal consistency as well as the content, construct, and convergent validity of the Psycholinguistic Screening Tool for children aged 7 through 9; 11 years for those items covering oral similarity, morphological closure, proper word repetition, spoken and written vocabulary, proper word repetition, spoken and written vocabulary, sequencing of events, sight and sound decoding, and sound spelling. Although nonsense word repetition, sight spelling, phonological rhyming awareness, and production subtests were found to have convergent validity as well as internal consistency, statistical studies did not quite prove their construct validity.

Conclusion and recommendations

(a) The phonological rhyming awareness and production as well as nonsense word repetition and sight spelling subtests should be revised taking into consideration the Arabic educational curriculum applied in Egyptian schools. (b) Further studies should be carried out on the Arabic Screening Tool to study predictive validity on a larger group of children. (c) Studies should be carried out using the Arabic Psycholinguistic Screening Tool on a group of children with learning disabilities to examine its diagnostic sensitivity.


  1. Coltheart M, Rastle K, Perry C, Langdon R, Ziegler J. DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychol Rev. 2001; 108: 204–256

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Tanenhaus MK, Spivey Knowlton MJ, Eberhard KM, Sedivy JC. Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science. 1995; 268: 1632–1634

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Horace Bidwell English. A comprehensive dictionary of psychological and psychoanalytical terms. 9th ed. New York: David McKay Company Inc.; 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Packard JL Chinese words and the lexicon The morphology of Chinese: a linguistic and cognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996. pp. 284–309.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hammill DD, Mather N, Roberts R. ITPA-3: Illinois test of psycholinguistic abilities. 3rd ed Austin, TX: Urbana University of Illinois; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McLoughlin JA, Lewis RB Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary. 10th ed. New York: Merriam-Webster Inc.; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lenneberg EH Language development in mongoloid children Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley; 1967. pp. 309–328

    Google Scholar 

  8. House E The random house dictionary. New York, USA: Random House Inc.; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rosner J, Simon D. The auditory analysis test: an initial report. J Learn Disabil. 1971; 4: 384–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Castles A, Coltheart M. Varieties of developmental dyslexia. Cognition. 1993; 47: 149–180

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Vellutino FR, Scanlon DA, Tanzman MS. Components of reading ability: issues and problems in operational word identification, phonological coding. Baltimo: Brookes; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Newcomer PL. Diagnostic assessment battery. 3rd ed. Austin, TX: PRO-ED; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Odisho EY Techniques of teaching comparative pronunciation in Arabic and English. Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Pr Llc; 2005.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Benner JA. Learn biblical hebrew: a guide to learning the Hebrew alphabet, vocabulary and sentence structure of the hebrew bible. College Station, TX: Publishing; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Crystal D. The cambridge encyclopedia of language. 2nd ed Edinburgh, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Azza AA, Gad Alla MA, Shoubary AM, Abdel Wahab Standardization and modification of illinois test of psycholinguistic abilities on Egyptian children. Cairo, Egypt: Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tomblin JB, Morris HL, Spriestersbach DC Diagnosis in speech-language pathology. Albany, NY: Singular; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Stuart M. Processing strategies in a phoneme deletion task. Q J Exp Psychol A. 1990; 42: 305–327

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Meeker WQ, Escobar LA. Statistical methods for reliability data. 1st ed Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Interscience; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cortina JM. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol. 1993; 78: 98–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Schmitt N. Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychol Assess. 1996; 8: 350–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zinbarg RE, Yovel I, Revelle W, McDonald RP. Estimating generalizability to a latent variable common to all of a scale’s indicators: a comparison of estimators for ωh. Appl Psychol Meas. 2006; 30: 121–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McDonalds RP. Test theory: a unified treatment. Department of Psychology, Birbeck College, London Psychology Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Zinbarg RE, Revelle W, Yovel I, W Li. Cronbach’s α Revelle’s β and McDonald’s ωH: their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika. 2005; 70: 123–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dalia Mostafa Osman.

Additional information

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aziz, A.A., Shaheen, E.A., Osman, D.M. et al. Arabic psycholinguistic screening tool: a preliminary study. Egypt J Otolaryngol 28, 64–73 (2012).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: