Rita G. Rudel

Rapid ‘automatized’ naming (R.A.N.): Dyslexia differentiated from other learning disabilities

Abstract Performance on tests requiring rapid repetitive naming of pictured objects, colors, letters and numbers differentiates dyslexic children not only from normal controls but also from non-dyslexic, otherwise learning-disabled children. A deficit in automatization of verbal responses to visual stimuli, not restricted to symbols, correlates specifically with dyslexia. That this deficit is not part of a generalized slowing of reaction time is reflected in the higher mean performance I.Q. (WISC) of the dyslexic Ss, who also showed fewer signs of neurological impairment than did the non-dyslexic Ss.

Rapid "automatized" naming of pictured objects, colors, letters and numbers by normal children.

Summary 180 normal children, ages five through ten years, were given a set of nine naming tests, each involving 50 timed responses to five randomly recurring pictured objects, colors, letters or numbers. “Automatization” of naming, measured by speed, accuracy, and consistency on these tasks, did not parallel the developmental order of acquisition of the various categories of names; letters and numbers were named relatively faster than were colors and objects as early as age six years. Childrens facility in “automatization” of naming different semantic categories is considered in terms of the contributions of overlearning, stimulus discriminability, “operativity”, word frequency and response competition; only the last two appear to be explanatory factors.

The functional asymmetry of Braille letter learning in normal, sighted children

Eighty right-handed children (40 boys, 40 girls) aged 7 to 14 were taught to read 12 Braille letters by palpation, using a paired associates method. Forty learned six letters with their left hand and then six other letters with their right; the left-right order was reversed for the remaining 40. Although language is involved, this tactile-verbal paired associate learning ultimately is better accomplished by the left hand. The results are discussed in terms of other demonstrations that (1) the left hand may be superior to the right on spatial tasks that exclude vision, (2) girls develop more slowly in the performance of left-sided (right-hemisphere-dependent) tasks, and (3) girls depend more than boys on left-hemisphere mediation.

Relation of forward and backward digit repetition to neurological impairment in children with learning disabilities.

The WISC digit span scaled scores of 297 children with learning disabilities fell below any of their overall I.Q. measures. More than 30 per cent of these Ss also had a greater than normal difference of 3 or more digits between their forward and backward spans. When 292 Ss for whom neurological data were available were categorized according to their signs (none, predominantly left, right, or bilateral), Ss with right-sided signs (presumed left hemisphere damage) were worse on digits forward, while Ss with left-sided signs (presumed right hemisphere damage) were worse on digits backward. Most Ss who could not repeat digits backward at all had bilateral impairment. Analysis of the data by age, suggests that the large gap between forward and backward digits, characteristic of the group with left-sided signs, tends to increase with age since their ability to repeat digits forward improves without concommitant improvement in their ability to repeat them backward. Conversely, the backward span of the group with right-sided signs tends to “catch up” and even equal their limited forward repetition. The data appear to support a left-hemisphere-dependent auditory verbal component of the digit span task reflected in digits forward and a right-hemisphere-dependent, visuo-spatial component reflected in digits backward. The distribution of verbal and performance WISC scores of these Ss, as well as their forward and backward digit spans, suggest that patterns of adult hemispheric asymmetry are similar in children with restricted early brain damage.

The development of left‐hand superiority for discriminating braille configurations

Discrimination of braille configurations was performed better by the left hand of right-handed sighted children overage 10, paralleling a previous study in which the names of braille letters were learned. Left-hand superiority occurred sooner in males, but they were not better at the task than females, more of whom maintained a left-hand advantage as adults. As in vision, configurations differing in orientation were more difficult to discriminate than those differing in number or displacement, but this order of difficulty was the same for both hands.

Rapid silent response to repeated target symbols by dyslexic and nondyslexic children.

Abstract A previous study demonstrated that naming of repeated colors, objects, letters, and numbers (RAN test) was performed more slowly by dyslexic than by nondyslexic learning disabled children, whereas both groups were slower than controls. A test eliminating the vocal response and requiring “cancellation” of selected verbal targets distinguished the two learning disabled groups from each other only when the targets were triads of numbers or letters, the dyslexic group performing more slowly. Compared even with triad target selection, however, dyslexic children were relatively more impaired on rapid naming (RAN), suggesting a specific relationship of reading to speech or the greater mobilization of language functions which speech requires.

Tests that discriminate between dyslexic and other learning-disabled boys

Abstract Dyslexic and nondyslexic boys within a single communitys learning-disabled class were given a set of tests; performance on each of these tests has been reported to be significantly impaired in other dyslexic children compared to learning-disabled and normal groups. Linear discriminant function analysis revealed that error types rather than levels of performance best separated the carefully matched learning-disabled groups. Slow naming and high percentage of “dysphasic” errors characterized dyslexic boys. Visual temporal-spatial matching and “configuration-deficient” perceptual errors characterized the adequate readers who have other learning disabilities.

Piracetam and dyslexia: effects on reading tests

Previous research has suggested that dyslexics treated with piracetam have shown improvements in reading skills, verbal memory and verbal conceptualizing ability, feature analysis, and processing of letter-like stimuli. Two hundrend twenty-five dyslexic children between the ages of 7 years 6 months and 12 years 11 months whose reading skills were significantly below their intellecutual capacity were enrolled in a multicenter, 36-week, double-blind, placebo-contrlled study. Children of below average intelligence, with abnormal findings on audiologic, ophthalmologic, neurologic, psychiatric, and physical examinations, who were emotionally disturbed or educationally deprived and who had recently been treated with psychoactive medication were excluded from the trial. Piracetam was well tolerated, with no serious adverse clinical or laboratory effects reported. Piracetam-treated children showed significant improvements in reading ability (Gray Oral Reading Test) and reading comprehension (Gilmore Oral Reading Test). Treatment effects were evident after 12 weeks and were sustained for the total period (36 weeks)

The effect of varying stimulus context on word-finding ability: Dyslexia further differentiated from other learning disabilities

Abstract All learning-disabled children, dyslexic and nondyslexic, were found to be impaired relative to controls on a variety of naming tests: (1) naming pictured objects (visual name), (2) responding with an object name to a definition (auditory definition), (3) completing a sentence with an object name (auditory sentence), or (4) naming palpated objects (tactual). Only on the sentence completion task (auditory sentence), which has been found to be the simplest response mode, were the dyslexic subjects selectively less accurate than the nondyslexic learning disabled, relative to the control group. Although dyslexic subjects tend to circumlocute when naming objects, they did not find it easier, relative to other groups, to give the function rather than the name of objects. Time scores were not in the same direction. The nondyslexic learning-disabled group responded more rapidly than either the dyselxic subjects or controls and made more perceptual errors, findings that may be related to some other factor, possibly the hyperactivity of many of the children in the nondyslexic learning-disabled group. The finding, also, that most of their naming error scores correlate highly with each other as well as with standardized language measures (WISC-R Vocabulary and PPVT), whereas those of the dyslexic and control groups do not, further suggests some underlying pathology to which their language disability is related. Language impairment, then, may be a common factor in all learning disability, dyslexic and nondyslexic, possibly for different reasons.

Relationship of IQ and Reading Score to Visual, Spatial, and Temporal Matching Tasks

Intersensory integration has been extensively explored in relation to reading and its developmental anomalies. Since matching across sensory modalities also involves different modes of presentation (auditory-sequential vs. visual-spatial), we tested the ability of normal and learning disabled children to match spatially arranged patterns of dots as well as sequences of light flashes within a single modality, vision. Normal and experimental subjects found it easiest to match spatial patterns with each other, and that task did not distinguish between the two groups. The other tasks were more difficult for both, particularly when sequential flashes of light were presented first and had to be matched to other flashes of light or to a spatial pattern. On these tasks the performance of normal children was significantly better than that of the learning disabled. Only the condition which required matching from sequence to pattern correlated with reading age among the learning disabled: possibly it is a process similar to word blending. Only those matching tasks which involved sequencing (the temporal display of flashes) correlated with WISC Performance and Full Scale IQ, while none of them correlated with WISC Verbal IQ. The oldest normal subjects performed better on all the tasks than younger ones, particularly surpassing younger children on matching a temporal standard and a spatial comparison. The oldest learning disabled children did not perform significantly better than the youngest.