Specific reading retardation and working memory: A review

Abstract

Research into the memory deficit of retarded readers is examined within a working memory framework. Although much of the evidence in this area is confusing, there is fairly consistent evidence that reading retardation can be associated with a deficit in long-term storage of phonological information. This deficit may affect retarded readers' ability to utilize the articulatory loop, a short-term store which appears to play an important role in certain aspects of normal reading acquisition. On the other hand, there is fairly consistent evidence that retarded readers perform normally at storing non-verbal information and the semantic aspects of verbal information in long-term memory. Problems with current research strategies are discussed and suggestions for future research directions are made.

Serial Recall of Poor Readers in Two Presentation Modalities: Combined Effects of Phonological Similarity and Word Length

“…At present, there is no clear explanation for this finding. The majority of studies on serial recall performance in poor readers-even those manipulating task or subject factors in such a way that recall strategies, rehearsal abilities, or extent of phonological coding were similar for poor and normal readers-found lower overall performance for poor readers compared to normal readers (for reviews see Brady, 1991, andJorm, 1983;de Gelder & Vroomen, in press;Hall et al, 1983;Watson & Engle, 1982). In the study by de Gelder and Vroomen (in press), adult dyslexic subjects did not differ from normal reading adults in effects of presentation modality (written words, spoken words, sounds or pictures of the same stimuli), but did show lower overall performance.…”

Visual-Spatial Attention in Developmental Dyslexia

“…Four etiological causes for dyslexia have been suggested: perceptual deficits (e.g., Hinshelwood, 1917;Orton, 1937), memory deficits (e.g., Liberman, Mann and Shankweiler, 1982;Jorn, 1983), language processing deficits (e.g., Rozin and Gleitman, 1977;Marsh, Freidman and Welsh, 1981), and visual processing deficits (e.g., Lovegrove, Martin and Slaghuis, 1982;Livingstone, Rosen, Drislane et al, 1991).…”

What we know about acquisition of adult literacy

“…The relevant memory is specific to linguistic material or material that is easy to code linguistically because little or no relations have been reported between reading acquisition and memory for non−verbal material (Brady 1986;Bryant 1986;Jorm 1983;Liberman and Shankweiler 1991). Liberman, and others (1977, p. 207) have provided a plausible explanation for this relation.…”

“…First, they are not necessarily independent, because, for example, phonological coding may be related to working memory or to verbal memory (Ellis 1988;Jorm 1983;Liberman and Shankweiler 1991;Mann 1991;Tunmer 1991;Wagner and Torgersen 1987). Second, the predictors may vary in importance at different stages of reading acquisition.…”

“…In attempting to identify important correlates of success in learning to read, many reviews of the literature were examined (Bryant 1986;Golinkoff 1978;Jorm 1983;Liberman and Shankweiler 1991;Mann 1991;Rayner and Pollatsek 1989;Share, Jorm, Maclean, and Matthews 1984;Stanovich 1986Stanovich 1991Venezky 1978). Only three predictors were identified for which substantial evidence was available documenting a relatin with success in learning to read: phonological or phonemic awareness; memory for verbal material; and working memory.…”