Spell Checker - Criticism

Criticism

Some critics of technology and computers have attempted to link spell checkers to a trend of skill losses in writing, reading, and speaking. They claim that the convenience of computers has led people to become lazy, often not proofreading written work past a simple pass by a spell checker. Supporters claim that these changes may actually be beneficial to society, by making writing and learning new languages more accessible to the general public. They claim that the skills lost by the invention of automated spell checkers are being replaced by better skills, such as faster and more efficient research skills. Other supporters of technology point to the fact that these skills are not being lost to people who require and make use of them regularly, such as authors, critics, and language professionals.

An example of the problem of completely relying on spell checkers is shown in the Spell-checker Poem above. It was originally composed by Dr. Jerrold H. Zar in 1991, assisted by Mark Eckman with an original length of 225 words, and containing 123 incorrectly used words. According to most spell checkers, the poem is valid, although most people would be able to tell at a simple glance that most words are used incorrectly. As a result, spell checkers are sometimes derided as spilling chuckers or similar, slightly misspelled names.

Not all of the critics are opponents of technological progress, however. An article based on research by Galletta et al. reports that in the Galletta study, higher verbal skills are needed for highest performance when using a spell checker. The theory suggested that only writers with higher verbal skills could recognize and ignore false positives or incorrect suggestions. However, it was found that those with the higher skills lost their unaided performance advantage in multiple categories of errors, performing as poorly as the low verbals with the spell-checkers turned on. The conclusion points to some evidence of a loss of skill.