Identifying dyslexia with confirmatory latent profile analysis

Niileksela, Christopher R.; Templin, Jonathan

doi:10.1002/pits.22183

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This variation might be important to consider in comparing results due to the possibility of different degrees of reading difficulties, as well the potential inclusion of different DRD subtypes. Previous studies successfully identified subtypes of DRD using learning algorithms such as mixed modeling (Torppa et al, 2007 ), latent profile analysis (Wolff, 2010 ) and confirmatory latent profile analysis (Niileksela and Templin, 2019 ). Although it would be interesting to see how DRD subtypes affect N170w development, this might be challenging in brain research due to lower sample sizes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Typical and Atypical Development of Visual Expertise for Print as Indexed by the Visual Word N1 (N170w): A Systematic Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The visual word N1 (N170w) is an early brain ERP component that has been found to be a neurophysiological marker for print expertise, which is a prelexical requirement associated with reading development. To date, no other review has assimilated existing research on reading difficulties and atypical development of processes reflected in the N170w response. Hence, this systematic review synthesized results and evaluated neurophysiological and experimental procedures across different studies about visual print expertise in reading development. Literature databases were examined for relevant studies from 1995 to 2020 investigating the N170w response in individuals with or without reading disorders. To capture the development of the N170w related to reading, results were compared between three different age groups: pre-literate children, school-aged children, and young adults. The majority of available N170w studies (N = 69) investigated adults (n = 31) followed by children (school-aged: n = 21; pre-literate: n = 4) and adolescents (n = 1) while some studies investigated a combination of these age groups (n = 12). Most studies were conducted with German-speaking populations (n = 17), followed by English (n = 15) and Chinese (n = 14) speaking participants. The N170w was primarily investigated using a combination of words, pseudowords, and symbols (n = 20) and mostly used repetition-detection (n = 16) or lexical-decision tasks (n = 16). Different studies posed huge variability in selecting electrode sites for analysis; however, most focused on P7, P8, and O1 sites of the international 10–20 system. Most of the studies in adults have found a more negative N170w in controls than poor readers, whereas in children, the results have been mixed. In typical readers, N170w ranged from having a bilateral distribution to a left-hemispheric dominance throughout development, whereas in young, poor readers, the response was mainly right-lateralized and then remained in a bilateral distribution. Moreover, the N170w latency has varied according to age group, with adults having an earlier onset yet with shorter latency than school-aged and pre-literate children. This systematic review provides a comprehensive picture of the development of print expertise as indexed by the N170w across age groups and reading abilities and discusses theoretical and methodological differences and challenges in the field, aiming to guide future research.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021228444.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Typical and Atypical Development of Visual Expertise for Print as Indexed by the Visual Word N1 (N170w): A Systematic Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 1975, the U.S. government recognized the IQ-achievement discrepancy model as the primary criterion for LD identification, which was maintained until only recently (Niileksela & Templin, 2019). According to this procedure, a student is identified as having an LD when their standardized test scores fall below what would be expected based on the student's IQ score.…”

Section: Procedures For Identifying Students With Learning Disabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Labeling is not the Issue: The Benefits of Labeling Children with Learning Disabilities when Response to Intervention is Implemented

Alzahraney

2023

IJSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Labeling students with disabilities has been an educational practice since the U.S.’s passing of P.L. 94-142 in 1975; however, the issue of students being labeled as “learning disabled” remains an ongoing controversy in special education. While some researchers have focused on the negative stigma surrounding students with learning disability (LD) labels, others have highlighted the positive outcomes of these students. This paper analyzed both perspectives on the labeling of students with LDs and focused on its positive outcomes to demonstrate that labels help these students succeed in school. It also discussed the rationales for using the IQ-achievement discrepancy model and the response to intervention (RTI) approach, including their varying implementation procedures and methods, to identify students with LDs. Finally, it addressed the barriers to successfully implementing RTI in schools and explained the implications of using this approach with students with LDs, parents, general educators, and special educators.

show abstract

“…Jong & van der Leij, 2003;Lyytinen et al, 2004). It comes as no surprise that these skills are often impaired in poor decoders (e.g., Niileksela & Templin, 2018;Zoubrinetzky et al, 2014).…”

Section: Pre-reading Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These skills predict both concurrent (e.g., Landerl et al, 2013; Melby‐Lervåg et al, 2012; Tijms, 2004) and future word decoding abilities (e.g., de Jong & van der Leij, 2003; Lyytinen et al, 2004). It comes as no surprise that these skills are often impaired in poor decoders (e.g., Niileksela & Templin, 2018; Zoubrinetzky et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding variation in prospective poor decoders: A person‐centred approach from kindergarten to Grade 2

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, we aimed to clarify variation in prospective poor decoders by studying the development of their word decoding skills during the first 1½ years of formal reading education and their unique pre‐reading profiles before the onset of formal reading education. Using structural equation modelling and a factorial mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA), we found autoregression and growth in the word decoding efficiency of prospective poor decoders (n = 90) and matched prospective adequate decoders (n = 90) in first and second grade. However, the gap between the two groups widened over time. Next, we zoomed in on the group of poor decoders by retrospectively studying their individual variation regarding cognitive and linguistic pre‐reading skills. Using latent profile analysis, we found three distinct pre‐reading profiles: (1) Poor PA, Letter Knowledge, RAN, and Verbal STM; (2) Poor PA and Letter Knowledge; and (3) Poor RAN. Together, these findings suggest that reading difficulties emerge at the intersection of multiple risk factors which can be detected in kindergarten, and that these reading problems persist throughout early reading education.

show abstract

Identifying dyslexia with confirmatory latent profile analysis

Cited by 9 publications

References 63 publications

Typical and Atypical Development of Visual Expertise for Print as Indexed by the Visual Word N1 (N170w): A Systematic Review

Typical and Atypical Development of Visual Expertise for Print as Indexed by the Visual Word N1 (N170w): A Systematic Review

Labeling is not the Issue: The Benefits of Labeling Children with Learning Disabilities when Response to Intervention is Implemented

Understanding variation in prospective poor decoders: A person‐centred approach from kindergarten to Grade 2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About