排序方式： 共有2条查询结果，搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
2.
A controversy whether developmental dyslexia is qualitatively different from other forms of reading disability has existed
among reading specialists for many years because poor readers, regardless of the labels attached to them, resemble each other
symptomatically (i.e., in reading achievement). For this reason, it is difficult to establish a priori criteria based on symptoms
to identify dyslexia and compare it with other forms of reading disability. One possible solution to this impasse is to see
if poor readers differ in the etiology of their reading disability and, if they do, then to see whether one group of poor
readers fits the traditional definition of dyslexia. This strategy was adopted in the present study. In this paper, it was
hypothesized that the etiology of dyslexia is different from that of other forms of reading disability because there is a
difference in the components that malfunction in dyslexia and other forms of reading disability. Studies have shown that the
two components that account for a large proportion of variance in reading are decoding and comprehension. Previous studies
also indicate that dyslexic children are deficient in decoding skills but not necessarily in comprehension. In this study,
reading-disabled children were divided into two groups on the basis of their listening comprehension. Children whose listening
comprehension was at or above grade level were placed in one group; poor readers with below-grade-level listening comprehension
were placed in the second group. Both groups, however, were matched for reading comprehension. The two groups and a control
group of normal readers were administered a number of tasks that were designed to assess the efficiency of the components
of reading. It was found that poor readers with normal listening comprehension were deficient in tasks that involved grapheme-phoneme
conversion (Component I, decoding). When tested on tasks that minimized decoding requirements, their reading comprehension
was comparable to that of normal readers. In contrast, the group with sub-average listening comprehension was poor in measures
of reading comprehension, even when decoding requirements were minimal. With the exception of very few children, this group
also had adequate decoding skills. Because poor readers with normal listening comprehension had average or above average IQ,
they conform to the traditional definition of dyslexia. Poor readers with below average listening comprehension had below
average IQ and could be considered as “general reading backward.” It was, therefore, concluded that the etiology of developmental
dyslexia is different from that of general reading backwardness.
In this paper, the termetiology refers to proximal causal factors such as decoding and comprehension and not to distal causal factors such as genetic and
neurological characteristics. 相似文献
1