Do Immediate Memory Deficits in Students with Learning Disabilities in Reading Reflect a Developmental Lag or Deficit?: A Selective Meta-Analysis of the Literature

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to synthesize research that directly compares children with and without learning disabilities in reading on immediate memory performance. Forty-one studies were included in the synthesis, which involved 161 effect sizes. The overall mean effect size estimate in favor of children without learning disabilities in reading was -.61 ( SD=.87). Effect size estimates were submitted to a descriptive and a weighted least-square regression analysis. Results from the full regression model indicated that children with learning disabilities were distinctly disadvantaged compared to average readers when memory manipulations required the naming of visual information and task conditions involved serial recall. Age, IQ, and reading scores were not significant predictors of effect size estimates. Most importantly, nonstrategic (type of task and materials) rather than strategic factors best predicted effect size estimates. The results also indicated that memory difficulties of readers with learning disabilities persisted across age, suggesting that a deficit model best captures the performance of children with learning disabilities. Results are discussed in relation to current developmental models of learning disabilities.

The influence of working memory on reading growth in subgroups of children with reading disabilities

“…At the time when we implemented the study, a consensus of research studies using measures to tap the episodic buffer were not available. A meta-analysis of the earlier literature suggests that visual storage for children with RD is intact (O'Shaughnessy & Swanson, 1998). However, these findings may be a function of processing demands (for a review, see Swanson, 2005, pp.…”

“…This is because successful performance on STM measures draws on two major components of the phonological loop: a speech-based phonological input store and a rehearsal process (Baddeley, 1986). Research to date on STM indicates that children with RD rehearse less and perform more poorly than do skilled readers on tasks requiring the short-term retention of order information (e.g., O'Shaughnessy & Swanson, 1998), suggesting inefficient 1 The distinctions made between the central executive system and a passive storage system (i.e., the phonological loop) in Baddeley and Logie's (1999) model in some ways parallel the distinctions made between WM and STM. WM is referred to as a processing resource of limited capacity involved in the preservation of information while processing the same or other information (e.g., Baddeley & Logie, 1999;Engle et al, 1999;Just, Carpenter, & Keller, 1996;Oberauer, Sub, Wilhelm, & Wittman, 2003) In contrast, STM typically involves situations where small amounts of material are held passively (i.e., minimal resources from long-term memory are activated to interpret the tasks such as digit or word span tasks) and then are reproduced in a sequential fashion.…”

Working Memory and Strategy Instruction in Children with Learning Disabilities

“…The most comprehensive quantitative review of STM research in terms of interventions for children with LD was published some time ago (O'Shaughnessy & Swanson, 1998 ), but did cover a 25-year period. The synthesis analyzed published studies that directly compared readers with LD to average readers on at least one short-term measure.…”

“…Although the research is fairly clear that children with LD in reading and/or math fail to implement memory strategies spontaneously and effi ciently (see O'Shaughnessy & Swanson, 1998 ), the research has been unclear, however, as to whether such children's knowledge base about strategies is defi cient and/or if such children can be taught to use strategies on WM tasks to improve performance. The general importance of strategy knowledge has been shown in the child development research on meta-memory (see Swanson & Stomel, 2012 , for review).…”

‘Children at Risk’ of Poor Educational Outcomes: Insights from a (Neuro-)Cognitive Perspective

“…Palmer 2000;Swanson 1993Swanson , 1999 but it has been claimed that these deficits might be due to phonological requirements of the tasks used to measure the central executive (Schuchardt et al 2008). Furthermore, studies analyzing visual-spatial working memory capacity in children with reading disorders revealed an inconsistent pattern of results (Eden and Stein 1995;Howes et al 2003;Kibby et al 2004, Menghini et al 2011O'Shaughnessy and Swanson 1998;Pickering 2006). For mathematical learning disorders, a substantial body of research suggests particularly strong impairments in the central executive component of working memory (e.g.…”