Dichotic listening performance under high and low lexical work load in subtypes of developmental dyslexia

Lamm, Oren; Epstein, Rachel

doi:10.1016/0028-3932(94)90016-7

Cited by 21 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…More probably, it signifies a basic verbal deficiency impairing the acquisition of reading. The stability of this pattern in poor readers from year to year found in the present study and its existence in a defined subgroup of poor readers in a wide age range in Lamm and Epstein's (1994) study lend additional support to this conclusion. We elected not to classify our poor readers into dyslexic and non-dyslexic subgroups in view of the current controversy over the validity of this differentiation (Nicolson, 1996;Stanovich, 1996;Aaron, 1997).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…This fits well with Dickstein and Tallal's (1987) suggestion that a subgroup of impaired readers suffers attentional capacity limitation, which is manifested only when neither of the simultaneously activated CVs has to be ignored by the subjects in order to produce the best response. Cohen, Hynd and Hugdahl's (1992) data, Lamm and Epstein's (1994) data and the present findings indicate that the hypothesis of 'attentional capacity limitation' used to describe the deficiency in impaired readers who show ear suppression in free recall of dichotically presented words and/or CVs may be replaced by a more specific hypothesis suggesting a deficient 'syllabic buffer' in such cases. In other words, it is not an auditory perceptual deficiency that causes such subjects to neglect one ear in free recall conditions, but the inability to store one of two different syllables (activated in parallel) until it can be delivered to the processors related to response production.…”

Section: Specific Verbal Deficiencies and The Words Dichotic Testmentioning

confidence: 50%

“…Poor readers performed worse than other subjects in both ears, but this was more marked with left-ear performance. That is, if a measure of performance combining overall performance and absolute ear difference had been used by Hugdahl and Anderson, differences between poor and normally achieving readers comparable with those reported by Lamm and Epstein (1994) might have been found. However, it is possible that some poor readers in Hugdahl and Anderson's study had only transient reading difficulties, since the differences in reading scores between good and poor readers were markedly less one year later.…”

Section: The Effects Of Reading Level On Dichotic Performancementioning

confidence: 59%

“…It is thus concluded that although reading level may affect dichotic listening, the effects reported so far cannot convincingly explain the 'common' differences between good and poor readers in free recall of dichotically presented words found by Cohen, Hynd and Hugdahl (1992) and Lamm and Epstein (1994).…”

Section: The Effects Of Reading Level On Dichotic Performancementioning

confidence: 69%

“…Lamm and Epstein (1994) reported a small group of schoolchildren (aged 9-16) who failed in kindergarten-level phonemic awareness tests. These subjects (7% of all poor readers tested in that study) were also distinguished by extremely low performance by both ears in the words dichotic test, as were the illiterates tested by .…”

Section: The Effects Of Reading Level On Dichotic Performancementioning

confidence: 98%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Kindergarten dichotic listening as a predictor of first-grade reading achievement

Lamm

Shatil

et al. 1999

Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study we examined the contribution of reading acquisition to changes in dichotic listening test performance by young children between kindergarten and the end of grade 1. We found that longitudinal changes in the performance level of both dichotic tests used in this study (a digits test and a words test) did not correlate with school achievement in reading. On the other hand, kindergarten performance in the words dichotic test was a reliable predictor of failure in reading acquisition a year later. Moreover, most subjects who experienced difficulties in learning to read and in the words dichotic test also failed in a kindergarten test requiring the matching of syllable combinations with arbitrary letter-like symbols. It was thus hypothesized that both kindergarten tests were good predictors of reading difficulties owing to the implicit task of serial handling of simultaneously activated syllables.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Specific Verbal Deficiencies and The Words Dichotic Testmentioning

confidence: 50%

Section: The Effects Of Reading Level On Dichotic Performancementioning

confidence: 59%

Section: The Effects Of Reading Level On Dichotic Performancementioning

confidence: 69%

Section: The Effects Of Reading Level On Dichotic Performancementioning

confidence: 98%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Kindergarten dichotic listening as a predictor of first-grade reading achievement

Lamm

Shatil

et al. 1999

Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Dichotic listening deficits in children with dyslexia

Moncrieff

Black

2007

Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several auditory processing deficits have been reported in children with dyslexia. In order to assess for the presence of a binaural integration type of auditory processing deficit, dichotic listening tests with digits, words and consonant-vowel (CV) pairs were administered to two groups of right-handed 11-year-old children, one group diagnosed with developmental dyslexia and an age-matched control group. Dyslexic children performed more poorly than controls from their left ears when listening to digits and words and from their right ears when listening to CVs. Direction of ear advantage varied across individuals in both groups when tested with digits and CVs, but ear advantage was stable with words. Several factors that may have contributed to inconsistencies in direction of ear advantage are discussed. When the children were tested in a directed response mode, degree of ear advantage differed significantly between groups with both words and digits. More dyslexic than control children demonstrated clinically significant reductions in dichotic listening performance, but no uniform pattern of deficit emerged. Only the double correct score and the left ear score with CV pairs were predictive of word recognition performance in dyslexic children. Binaural integration deficits are present in some children with dyslexia. Auditory processing disorder assessment may help delineate factors that underlie or are associated with reading impairment in this population.

show abstract

Left-Handedness and Achievements in Foreign Language Studies

Lamm

Epstein

1999

Brain and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dichotic listening performance under high and low lexical work load in subtypes of developmental dyslexia

Cited by 21 publications

References 21 publications

Kindergarten dichotic listening as a predictor of first-grade reading achievement

Kindergarten dichotic listening as a predictor of first-grade reading achievement

Dichotic listening deficits in children with dyslexia

Left-Handedness and Achievements in Foreign Language Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About