01 NRDC Dyslexia 1-88 update - Texthelp
01 NRDC Dyslexia 1-88 update - Texthelp
01 NRDC Dyslexia 1-88 update - Texthelp
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Developmental dyslexia in adults: a research review<br />
149<br />
Study Construct group(s) Selection criteria<br />
Zabell, C. and Everatt, J. (2002).<br />
‘Surface and phonological<br />
subtypes of adult developmental<br />
dyslexia’. <strong>Dyslexia</strong>, 8, 160–177.<br />
Pisecco, S., Baker, D. B., Silva, P.<br />
A. and Brooke, M. (20<strong>01</strong>). ‘Boys<br />
with reading disabilities and/or<br />
ADHD: distinctions in early<br />
childhood’. Journal of Learning<br />
Disabilities, 34(2), 98–106.<br />
Dyslexic (vs. nondyslexic)<br />
adults<br />
Reading-disabled only<br />
(vs. RD/ADHD, ADHD<br />
only, and normal<br />
comparison) children<br />
For the study: current or recent<br />
university student status.<br />
For dyslexia: Educational<br />
Psychological Assessments<br />
confirming a diagnosis of dyslexia<br />
based on poor performance on<br />
measures of literacy and phonological<br />
processing in the absence of known<br />
general intellectual deficits,<br />
perceptual impairments and psychoemotional<br />
dysfunction and selfreported<br />
difficulty in learning to read.<br />
For reading disability: a reading score<br />
at least 1.5 SD below the male<br />
sample’s average reading score.<br />
Kirk, J. and Reid, G. (20<strong>01</strong>). ‘An<br />
examination of the relationship<br />
between dyslexia and offending in<br />
young people and the implications<br />
for the training system’. <strong>Dyslexia</strong>,<br />
7, 77–84.<br />
Dyslexic (vs. nondyslexic)<br />
young<br />
offenders<br />
For dyslexia: ‘positive’ indicators of<br />
dyslexia as calculated by the<br />
computerised self-assessment<br />
screening test for dyslexia, QuickScan<br />
(normed on university students).<br />
Curtin, S., Manis, F. R. and<br />
Seidenberg, M. S. (20<strong>01</strong>). ‘Parallels<br />
between the reading and spelling<br />
deficits of two subgroups of<br />
developmental dyslexics’. Reading<br />
and Writing, 14(5–6), 515–547.<br />
de Martino, S., Espesser, R., Rey,<br />
V. and Habib, M. (20<strong>01</strong>). ‘The<br />
‘temporal processing deficit’<br />
hypothesis in dyslexia: new<br />
experimental evidence’. Brain and<br />
Cognition, 46(1–2), 104–108.<br />
Phonological and<br />
surface dyslexic<br />
children vs. normal<br />
readers<br />
Phonological dyslexic<br />
vs. normal control<br />
children<br />
For poor readers: initially, teacher<br />
nomination based on estimates that<br />
subjects were in the bottom quartile<br />
for reading; subsequently,<br />
classification by difficulty with either<br />
nonword reading or exception word<br />
reading.<br />
For dyslexia: normal IQ; no<br />
neurological, auditory or visual<br />
disorders of any kind; no attention<br />
deficit; and a two-year lag in reading<br />
ability.<br />
Facoetti, A., Turatto, M., Lorusso,<br />
M. L. and Mascetti, G. G. (20<strong>01</strong>).<br />
‘Orienting of visual attention in<br />
dyslexia: evidence for asymmetric<br />
hemispheric control of attention’.<br />
Experimental Brain Research,<br />
138(1), 46–53.<br />
Dyslexic children vs.<br />
normal readers<br />
For dyslexia: absence of spoken<br />
language impairment; full-scale IQ<br />
>85 as measured by WISC-R; no<br />
known gross behavioural or emotional<br />
problems; normal or corrected-tonormal<br />
vision and hearing; normal<br />
visual field; absence of ADHD; right<br />
manual preference.