Phonemes, Rhymes, and Intelligence as Predictors of Children's Responsiveness to Remedial Reading Instruction: Evidence from a Longitudinal Intervention Study

Hatcher, Peter J.; Hulme, Charles

doi:10.1006/jecp.1998.2480

Cited by 125 publications

(111 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, widely used and standardized measures of reading and language failed to predict future reading gains in dyslexia, although it is possible that there are behavioral measures not included here that may predict outcome (e.g., ref. 43). It is also unknown whether the fMRI contrast in the present study was optimal for making predictions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Neural systems predicting long-term outcome in dyslexia

Hoeft

McCandliss

Black

et al. 2010

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

426

391

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals with developmental dyslexia vary in their ability to improve reading skills, but the brain basis for improvement remains largely unknown. We performed a prospective, longitudinal study over 2.5 y in children with dyslexia (n = 25) or without dyslexia (n = 20) to discover whether initial behavioral or brain measures, including functional MRI (fMRI) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), can predict future long-term reading gains in dyslexia. No behavioral measure, including widely used and standardized reading and language tests, reliably predicted future reading gains in dyslexia. Greater right prefrontal activation during a reading task that demanded phonological awareness and right superior longitudinal fasciculus (including arcuate fasciculus) white-matter organization significantly predicted future reading gains in dyslexia. Multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) of these two brain measures, using linear support vector machine (SVM) and cross-validation, predicted significantly above chance (72% accuracy) which particular child would or would not improve reading skills (behavioral measures were at chance). MVPA of whole-brain activation pattern during phonological processing predicted which children with dyslexia would improve reading skills 2.5 y later with >90% accuracy. These findings identify right prefrontal brain mechanisms that may be critical for reading improvement in dyslexia and that may differ from typical reading development. Brain measures that predict future behavioral outcomes (neuroprognosis) may be more accurate, in some cases, than available behavioral measures.inferior frontal gyrus | prediction | compensation | fractional anisotropy | rhyming D evelopmental dyslexia, which occurs in 5-17% of children, is a persistent difficulty in learning to read that is not explained by sensory deficits, cognitive deficits, lack of motivation, or lack of adequate reading instruction (1). Approximately one-fifth of individuals with developmental dyslexia manage to compensate for their underlying learning difficulties and develop adequate reading skills by the time they reach adulthood (2), but the mechanisms by which this compensation occurs remain largely unknown. Improved reading observed in developmental dyslexia is rarely complete, but instead refers to a level of reading superior to clinical cutoff scores that closes the gap between poor reader and typical readers, and that allows children to read adequately for purposes of learning. Many factors likely influence whether dyslexic children make substantial progress in reading, including access to educational resources and interventions, and neuropsychological and behavioral characteristics (reviewed in refs. 3 and 4), such as whether children have multiple deficits (e.g., in both rapid naming and phonological processing; ref. 5). A number of studies have examined neuropsychological, behavioral, and demographic predictors of developing dyslexia (e.g., refs. 6-8) and short-term response to intervention (RTI) (3, 4), but there is little evidence...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Neural systems predicting long-term outcome in dyslexia

Hoeft

McCandliss

Black

et al. 2010

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

426

391

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As reported earlier, these children have often not qualified for special reading programs and have received treatment, if at all, through different mechanisms. However, research has shown that these children can benefit from intervention and, in the case of word recognition intervention, perhaps even to the same extent as children with a dyslexic profile (Hatcher & Hulme, 1999;RainingBird, Cleave, & McConnell, 2001;Torgesen, Wagner, et al, 1999;Vellutino, Scanlon, & Lyon, 2000).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subgrouping Poor Readers on the Basis of Individual Differences in Reading-Related Abilities

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated the use of the Reading Component Model to subgroup poor readers. A large sample of poor readers was identified in second grade and subgrouped on the basis of relative strengths and weaknesses in word recognition and listening comprehension. Although homogeneous subgroups were not identified, poor readers could be classified into four subgroups that differed significantly in reading-related abilities. Further analyses showed that poor readers' strengths and weaknesses in listening comprehension, and to a lesser extent in word recognition, were foreshadowed by their abilities on related kindergarten measures. Follow-up testing in the fourth grade indicated that poor readers' individual differences in word recognition and listening comprehension were consistent and that subgroups were moderately stable. The implications of these results for the assessment and remediation of reading disabilities are discussed.

show abstract

“…Many contemporary writers in the LD/dyslexia field see no need for intelligence (IQ scores) to form a part of the conceptual or operational definition (e.g. Hatcher & Hulme, 1999;Shaywitz, 2003;Siegel, 1989;Stanovich, 1991;Stuebing et al, 2002). However, some still advocate for its inclusion in the identification and assessment of LD/dyslexia (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Language‐related differences between discrepancy‐defined and non‐discrepancy‐defined poor readers: a longitudinal study of dyslexia in New Zealand

Tunmer

Chapman

2006

Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language-related differences between discrepancy-defined and non-discrepancy-defined poor readers were examined in a three-year longitudinal study that began at school entry. The discrepancy-defined (dyslexic) poor readers (n=19) were identified in terms of poor reading comprehension and average or above average listening comprehension performance, and the non-discrepancy-defined (non-dyslexic) poor readers (n=19) in terms of both poor reading and listening comprehension performance. The two poor reader groups and a group of normally developing readers (n=55) were given several oral language, phonological processing, and reading performance measures at six testing occasions. Results indicated that in addition to expected differences on the oral language measures, the non-discrepancy-defined poor readers also showed greater phonological processing deficits than the dyslexic poor readers. The results are discussed in terms of the lack of official recognition of dyslexia in New Zealand, the whole language orientation of classroom reading instruction, and the inadequacy of Reading Recovery for minimizing reading problems.

show abstract

Phonemes, Rhymes, and Intelligence as Predictors of Children's Responsiveness to Remedial Reading Instruction: Evidence from a Longitudinal Intervention Study

Cited by 125 publications

References 44 publications

Neural systems predicting long-term outcome in dyslexia

Neural systems predicting long-term outcome in dyslexia

Subgrouping Poor Readers on the Basis of Individual Differences in Reading-Related Abilities

Language‐related differences between discrepancy‐defined and non‐discrepancy‐defined poor readers: a longitudinal study of dyslexia in New Zealand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About