PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9134456

Specific learning disabilities: a neuropsychological perspective.

A Ardila
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A dispersion in cognitive abilities is expected in normal populations. Specific learning disabilities would represent an extreme polarity in a continuum of normal cognitive dispersion. Three propositions relative to learning disabilities are advanced in the present paper. First, specific learning disabilities are expected to be found for diverse cognitive functions, even though some of these specific learning disorders have yet to be described in scientific literature. Second, it is noted that specific "factors" can be affected in cases of learning disabilities. Lastly, a parallel between focal neuropsychological syndromes and specific learning disabilities is proposed. Developmental learning difficulties would represent dysfunctional or dysmaturational defects; whereas neuropsychological syndromes represent a consequence of acquired structural brain pathology.

Explore related subjects

DyslexiaHumansLearning DisabilitiesJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A Ardila. 1997. Specific learning disabilities: a neuropsychological perspective.. https://doi.org/10.3109/00207459708988474

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Cortical auditory event-related potentials in newborn infants.

The possibility of recording changes in electroencephalography potentials following perception of sound was reported several decades ago. The recent expanding research on auditory cortical event-related potentials (AERPs) for assessing sound discrimination abilities in children and infants has indicated that several methodological issues need to be addressed before it can be implemented in clinical practice. Latencies, polarities, and amplitudes of the responses change with gestational age and during infancy. Thus, the maturation of the infant must be considered when designing stimulus paradigms and interpreting the responses. Of healthy newborn infants, only about 80% will show mismatch negativity, the automatic change detection of the auditory stimuli. Currently, the AERP method cannot be applied in clinical practice in the neonatal period, although the findings in healthy newborns at risk for dyslexia are promising. Further research will elucidate the possibility of developing AERPs as a possible early screening method during infancy for later dyslexia or cognitive dysfunction.

Dyslexia↗
PubMed2006

Treatment integrity in a home-based pre-reading intervention programme.

Treatment integrity is an underexposed issue in the phonological awareness intervention research. The current study assessed the integrity of treatment of the families (N = 32) participating in the experimental condition of a home-based pre-reading intervention study. The participating kindergartners were all genetically at risk for developing dyslexia. Two aspects of treatment integrity, the number of lessons completed (quantity) and the quality of the administration of the programme (observed in a videotaped session), were investigated. The level of treatment integrity turned out to be 66% when completion of all lessons was taken as quantitative criterion, and about 74% when quality of the parent-child interaction was assessed. The two measures could predict the pre-reading skills at the end of kindergarten. Together they accounted for 43% of the variance in this dependent variable. Together with pre-reading scores at the pre-test the total predicted variance was 87%. The number of lessons completed still contributed 12% to the prediction after controlling for pre-test scores. The results indicated that treatment integrity indeed appears to be an important aspect of treatment outcome and should therefore be included in intervention studies.

Dyslexia↗
PubMed2006

Meta-analysis of the nonword reading deficit in specific reading disorder.

A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate whether specific reading disorder (SRD) groups demonstrate a deficit in using phonological recoding strategies. Thirty-four studies were reviewed that had compared the nonword reading performances of SRD groups with reading-level matched (RL) control groups. The average nonword reading difference between groups across the total number of studies was moderate (d = 0.65, N = 2865). Three predictors of the size of group differences in nonword reading ability were identified. Studies that used passage reading tests to match groups for reading level found significantly less evidence for nonword reading deficits than studies that used word-level reading accuracy tests. Secondly, there was a significant positive relationship between group differences in intelligence level (SRD-RL control group) and effect sizes. Finally, group differences in age showed a significant negative association with effect magnitudes. The mean age, reading level and intelligence level of groups did not significantly predict nonword reading outcomes. It was concluded that there was evidence for nonword reading deficits in SRD groups, consistent with the claim that deficient development of phonological recoding strategies is a leading cause of reading difficulties.

Dyslexia↗