But spell checker always corrects witch words eye misspelled

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract The present study examined spell checker software for both spelling recognition and production among college students. Sixty-four participants identified and corrected spelling in a prewritten story and produced spelling by writing a story. Both were completed with or without spell checker access. Results demonstrated differences between the performance of good and poor spellers (as defined using a baseline spelling test). When compared to good spellers, poor spellers corrected a greater percentage of spelling errors with spell checker than without. Spell checker helped all participants produce fewer spelling errors, but not fewer homophone errors. Additionally, more often than good spellers, poor spellers reported placing less effort into spelling words correctly when using spell checker. These findings suggest that poor spellers may have a greater need for spell checker than good spellers, and may be at a greater risk for relying on the software as the only step in the proofreading process.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.