Premium
Are dyslexics different? I. A comparison between dyslexics, reading age controls, poor readers and precocious readers
Author(s) -
Ellis Andrew W.,
McDougall Siné J. P.,
Monk Andrew F.
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
dyslexia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.694
H-Index - 51
eISSN - 1099-0909
pISSN - 1076-9242
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1099-0909(199602)2:1<31::aid-dys34>3.0.co;2-0
Subject(s) - psychology , reading (process) , dyslexia , rhyme , lexical decision task , spelling , phonological awareness , reading comprehension , audiology , active listening , developmental psychology , cognitive psychology , cognition , linguistics , communication , philosophy , medicine , poetry , neuroscience
Four groups of children with matched reading ages of 7:03–8:06 were given a battery of tests assessing a range of skills related to reading, visual processing and phonological processing. The groups were: (i) dyslexics (mean age 10:03, mean IQ 118 with a minimum of 105); (ii) younger normal readers (conventional ‘reading age controls’ with a mean age of 7:11 and a mean IQ of 107); (iii) ordinary poor readers (mean age 10:04, mean IQ 80); (iv) precocious readers (mean age 6:02, mean IQ 126). The dyslexics were faster at some of the visual processing tasks, including object naming, and did not differ significantly from the other three groups on any of the phonological processing tasks. There was no indication of less use of phonology in reading on the part of the dyslexics: they were no less affected by spelling‐sound regularity in lexical decision and naming than the other groups, showed a similar sensitivity to pseudohomophones in lexical decision, and were not significantly impaired in their reading of non‐words. Dyslexic reading comprehension was superior to that of the reading age controls and precocious readers and their listening comprehension was better than that of the other three groups. The poor readers were similar to the reading age controls on the visual processing tasks. They were worse than the reading age controls at discriminating rhyme but not at phoneme deletion, non‐word repetition or verbal memory span.