Comparison of matching the compound or elements as a differential problem‐solving response

Miller et al. (2025) asked kids to match either whole words or single letters and sounds. They used an alternating-treatments design. Five children with reading deficits took part.

The goal was to see which matching style helped kids learn new words faster.

Four out of five kids learned new words faster when they matched the parts, not the whole word. The element-matching DOR beat the compound-matching DOR.

One child showed no difference between the two styles.

Langsdorff et al. (2017) also used matching-to-sample, but with exclusion instead of parts. Both studies show that small tweaks in how you ask kids to match can change learning speed.

Early et al. (2012) taught sighted adults to read braille with matching-to-sample. Their success supports the idea that matching parts works across ages and scripts.

Channell et al. (2013) found that youth with intellectual disabilities struggle most with phonological decoding. Miller’s focus on single sounds lines up with that finding.

If a child stalls on new words, break the word into letters or sounds and have them match those parts. This small shift can cut learning time without extra tools. Try it during reading drills or when teaching sight words.