Why Kids Guess Words When They Read: It’s probably not what you think

If you’ve ever listened to a child read and thought, “They’re guessing,” you’re not alone.
Teachers, parents, and tutors alike see it, hear it, and try to correct it.

It’s true that some children were incorrectly taught to guess words based on context, the first letter, or pictures rather than decode print using phonics knowledge. Those cueing-based approaches have since been discredited.

And yet, even with explicit, systematic phonics instruction in place, guessing can still happen.

Cognitive neuroscience adds an important layer to this conversation that almost no one talks about, and it has to do with executive functions. The brain relies on shortcuts to work efficiently, which means learners must be able to slow down when accuracy matters. The cognitive process that allows the brain to do this is called inhibitory control-  the brain’s ability to pause, ignore distractions or shortcuts, and choose the correct response instead.

This connection became especially clear to me during a recent training with Dr. Grégoire Borst, a Paris-based cognitive neuroscientist. While his presentation focused broadly on learning how to learn, it prompted a deeper examination of how these same processes operate during word reading for early and struggling readers.

What looks like guessing is often the brain taking a shortcut, not a child deliberately choosing to guess a word. This can happen even when phonics instruction is in place.

The Brain is a Prediction Machine

The human brain is built to be efficient. To save energy, it constantly makes fast predictions using mental shortcuts known as heuristics.

Heuristics help us move quickly through the world by relying on:

• what looks familiar

• what usually comes next

• what makes sense in context

In everyday life, this is helpful. For example, we recognize a stop sign or a familiar face instantly without analyzing every detail.

However, the same shortcuts can mislead us, like when we skim a text message and misread a word because our brain filled in what it expected to see.

In early word reading, this can interfere with accuracy -  the brain is juggling multiple word possibilities at the same time.

Inhibitory Control: What Actually Happens When a Child Reads a Word

Beginner and struggling readers may appear to guess because the brain is inclined to take shortcuts instead of carefully attending to the letters. To read accurately, the reader must learn to slow down, ignore the wrong options, and focus deliberately on the print.

Even with strong phonics instruction in place, accurate word reading depends on inhibitory control, the brain’s ability to suppress shortcuts and competing word options so the correct word can be selected. This process, known as lexical inhibition, is still developing in young and struggling readers.

When inhibition is still developing, early readers are managing multiple demands at once:

• attending to print

• holding sounds in working memory

• suppressing competing word options

• integrating meaning

This is why even children with solid phonics knowledge may still read inaccurately. Phonics provides the information; inhibition determines whether the brain slows down enough to use it. When inhibition does not act quickly enough, the brain may select the most familiar or most meaningful option before fully checking the letters.

That is when "guessing" appears.

For example, a child reads “The pig played in the mud (dirt)," The child read mud instead of dirt because mud fits the meaning and is strongly predicted by context. The brain selects the incorrect word unless inhibition slows the reader down long enough to attend carefully to the letters in dirt.

Research based on the interactive activation model of word reading (McClelland & Rumelhart) shows that the brain does not activate just one word at a time. Rather, multiple possibilities are activated simultaneously:

• the word that matches the letters

• similar-looking words called orthographic neighbors

• more familiar or higher-frequency words

• words suggested by sentence context

These options compete. Accurate reading depends on inhibiting the wrong options quickly enough for the correct word to win.

This same inhibitory control mechanism helps explain common letter confusions like b/d. Before reading, the brain treats mirrored forms as equivalent. Reading requires inhibiting this tendency and attending carefully to orientation. These errors reflect an inhibitory control challenge, not a lack of instruction or effort.

Research also shows why inhibition can be especially strong in multilingual learners. Because multiple languages are active at the same time, multilingual brains regularly practice inhibiting one system while activating another, strengthening inhibitory control more broadly.

What looks like guessing is often the brain moving too fast, and effective instruction teaches readers when and how to slow down so print, not prediction, drives word reading.

Why Phonics Is Necessary but Not Always Enough

Phonics is essential. And also, neuroscience helps us see why phonics alone is not always sufficient for accurate word reading.

Studies examining inhibition within reading tasks show that accuracy decreases when words have close orthographic neighbors, when familiar competitors are strongly activated, and when sentence context increases competition.

In other words, even when children know the letter–sound correspondences, the brain may still select the wrong word if inhibitory control is not supported.

This is not a failure of phonics instruction.
It is a missing piece of the learning process — and one that must be addressed through how phonics is taught and practiced.

3 Ways to Design Instruction that Supports Inhibitory Control

If the brain is prone to shortcut-driven errors, instruction must teach readers when and how to slow down.

This means instruction cannot simply present phonics skills and hope accuracy follows. It must anticipate where shortcuts will occur and support inhibitory control before, during, and after reading.

Effective instruction does this in three key ways.

1. Anticipate predictable errors before reading

Many reading errors are not random. They are predictable outcomes of how the brain processes print.

Before reading, students benefit from being told explicitly what to watch out for and reminding how to improve accuracy.This might sound like:

• “Be careful. Pay close attention to every letter.”

• “Track with your finger so you don’t jump ahead.”

• “Slide through the whole word."

• “Slow down if the word is unfamiliar.”

This kind of guidance is not a reminder to try harder. It is an anticipatory support for inhibitory control, helping the brain pause before shortcuts take over.

2. Go Slow to Go Fast: Build the Habit of Accuracy Over Speed

Fluency is strongly linked to comprehension, but accuracy must come first. Fluent reading emerges only after words have been read correctly enough times to be stored for automatic retrieval.

Research on orthographic mapping by Linnea Ehri shows that words become permanently stored in memory when readers attend carefully to the letters, connect them to sounds, and read them accurately across repeated encounters. Speed is the outcome of this process, not the starting point.

For beginner and struggling readers, slowing down is essential. It gives the brain time to attend carefully to the letters, inhibit shortcuts, and decode the correct word. When instruction pushes speed too early or does not deliberately address inhibitory control, the brain is more likely to rely on prediction instead of print.

This is why effective instruction explicitly teaches students how to slow down while reading. In addition to reminding the child to track with a finger and slide through the whole word, simple supports like these make a difference:

• Setting up signals with the child to prompt for accuracy: The adult can track the text with a pencil as the student reads. A pause in the pencil signals the reader to slow down, attend carefully to the letters, and decode accurately. Keep verbal prompts to a minimum:

  • “Check the letters.”

  • “Go back and read it slowly.”

  • “Does what you said, match what you see?”

• Misread words and short phrases are reread correctly so that accuracy is prioritized over speed.
• Prompt the child to read unfamiliar, longer words more slowly and to break them into manageable chunks. Students learn that skilled readers adjust their pace to ensure accurate reading.
• When “look-alike words” are read incorrectly, students are prompted to monitor meaning after checking the letters.
  For example, if a student reads that instead of what, the teacher might say, “Check the letters again. Now reread the sentence. Does that make sense?” This reinforces that print comes first, with meaning used as a confirmation step rather than a guessing tool.

These supports are not crutches. They are temporary scaffolds that help the brain practice inhibitory control while accurate decoding is still effortful.

When a child misreads a word, the goal is not simply to correct it, but to slow the process down so the brain can reselect accurately. Prompts the child:

These reminders help students practice inhibiting the first response and attending to print. Over time, this builds the habit of accuracy before speed and supports the orthographic mapping process that makes fluent reading possible.

3. Design routines that reduce cognitive load

Consistency also matters. When instructional routines stay the same and only the content changes, students do not have to spend mental energy figuring out what to do next. This reduces cognitive load and allows working memory to focus on reading the word accurately.

Keep practice short and purposeful. Reading aloud for just 2 to 10 minutes, depending on the child’s stamina, is often sufficient. Productive struggle is important, but the level of struggle should guide the length of practice. Think of it as interval training rather than endurance work.

As words are read accurately and repeatedly, they become stored for instant retrieval. Over time, fluency improves. 

What This Means for Early and Struggling Readers

What looks like guessing is often the brain moving too fast. Research shows that readers with stronger inhibitory control read more accurately, even when tasks are complex or words compete for attention.

Neuroscience helps us see that accurate word reading requires more than phonics knowledge alone. It also depends on the ability to slow down, suppress predictions, and attend carefully to print. When these processes are still developing, shortcuts are more likely unless instruction deliberately supports inhibition.

This is where instruction matters most. When teaching anticipates predictable errors, supports inhibitory control in real time, and prioritizes accuracy over speed, readers are given what their brains actually need to learn. Over time, accurate decoding leads to automatic word recognition, and true fluency.

Fluent reading is not built by pushing speed.
It is built by teaching the brain to slow down first.

References

Ahr, E., Houdé, O., & Borst, G. (2016). Inhibition of the mirror generalization process in reading in school-aged children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 145, 157–165.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.12.009

Bialystok, E. (2017). The bilingual adaptation: How minds accommodate experience. Psychological Bulletin, 143(3), 233–262.
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000099

Borst, G., Ahr, E., Roell, M., & Houdé, O. (2015). The cost of blocking shortcuts in arithmetic problem solving: A developmental study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 134, 58–70.

De Rom, M., Van Reybroeck, M., & Borst, G. (2022). The role of inhibition in reading: Evidence from word and sentence processing. Scientific Studies of Reading, 26(5), 415–431.

Ehri, L. C. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5–21.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.819356

McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88(5), 375–407.

Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16(1), 32–71.

This post draws on research from cognitive neuroscience, developmental psychology, and reading science to explain why accurate word reading requires both phonics knowledge and the development of inhibitory control.