Dutch dyslexic adolescents: phonological-core variable-orthographic differences |
| |
| Authors: | Judith Bekebrede Aryan van der Leij David L Share |
| |
| Institution: | (1) Department of Education, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 94208, Amsterdam, 1090 GE, The Netherlands;(2) Department of Learning Disabilities, University of Haifa, Haifa, 31905, Israel |
| |
| Abstract: | The phonological-core variable-orthographic differences (PCVOD) model van der Leij, & Morfidi (2006). Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 74–90] has been proposed as an explanation for the heterogeneity among dyslexic readers in their profiles of reading-related
subskills. The predictions of this model were investigated in a sample of 72 Dutch secondary school students (dyslexics and
controls). First, the PCVOD assumption was confirmed that phonological processing and orthographic competence are independent
contributors to the prediction of reading fluency and spelling. Among the phonological processing tasks, phonological recoding
explained substantial unique variance, but not phonemic awareness or rapid serial naming. Next, the dyslexic readers were
divided into two subgroups based on high (ORTH+) and low levels (ORTH−) of orthographic competence. Both subgroups performed below controls on all measures tapping phonological processing, reading
and spelling but the ORTH+ group performed as well as non-disabled controls on Dutch and English orthographic choice. As predicted by the model, there
were no differences between the subgroups on the tasks that depend on phonological processing, with or without reading. There
were differences on Dutch word reading fluency and spelling. Furthermore, the ORTH+ subgroup outperformed ORTH− on tasks demanding speeded word processing such as ‘flashed’ presentation. This finding was independent of lexicality (words
or pseudowords), language (Dutch or English) or response mode (lexical decision or typing), but restricted to silent reading.
This supports the view that the ORTH+ subgroup is better at identifying larger orthographic units. There was no indication of differences between the subgroups
in reading experience. Our data, therefore, support the PCVOD model.
|
| |
| Keywords: | Dyslexia Orthography Phonology Second language Subtypes |
| 本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ |
|
