Premium
Speed of Multiplication in Dyslexics and Non‐dyslexics
Author(s) -
Turner Ellis S. A.,
Miles T. R.,
Wheeler T. J.
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(199606)2:2<121::aid-dys31>3.0.co;2-v
Subject(s) - multiplication (music) , spelling , dyslexia , developmental dyslexia , psychology , arithmetic , task (project management) , audiology , developmental psychology , reading (process) , cognitive psychology , mathematics , medicine , linguistics , combinatorics , philosophy , management , economics
The research reported in this paper was designed to answer four questions about dyslexics' speed of multiplication. First, do they need more time than non‐dyslexics to carry out multiplication sums? Secondly, are older dyslexics faster at this task than younger ones? Thirdly, is it the case that dyslexics are less able than non‐dyslexics to respond ‘in one’ to a given multiplication sum? Fourthly, do some products take longer time than others, and, if so, why? 144 multiplication sums, comprising every ‘pair’ from 1×1 to 12×12, were presented on a computer screen in random order on two separate occasions, and the subjects were required to type in the answer. All responses were timed. The subjects were 90 boys aged between 7 and 15 years of whom 30 were dyslexic; 30 were matched with the dyslexics for chronological age (CA controls) and 30 for spelling age (SA controls). They were subdivided into 3 age‐bands. 20,632 of the 25,920 responses (79.60%) were given correctly within 22 sec. Within each age‐band the dyslexics were consistently slower overall than the CA controls but consistently faster than the SA controls. The older children in all three groups were consistently faster than the younger ones. Fewer dyslexics than CA controls—but more than SA controls—were able to give answers ‘in one’ (defined as taking less than a given time). The 10× and 11× tended to be quicker than the 6×, 7×, 8×, and 9×; and in the case of some products involving the 6×, 7×, 8×, and 9× the dyslexics in the youngest age group were distinctively disadvantaged. On the practical side the importance of teaching algorithms is emphasized; on the theoretical side it is suggested that a possible explanation of the findings is in terms of the difficulty experienced by dyslexics in acquiring automaticity (Nicolson and Fawcett, 1990).