Dyslexia最新文献

Previous research suggests that dyslexic university students are unlikely to experience significant co-occurring motor or balance difficulties and may represent instances of ‘pure’ dyslexia. However, the motor and balance measures used in previous studies have been limited in scope. The primary aim of the present study was to capture a wider profile of the motor and balance difficulties experienced by dyslexic students. A group of 24 university students with dyslexia were matched on age and IQ to a group of 28 students without dyslexia. Both groups completed standardised tests of reading efficiency, IQ, and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms, as well as standardised motor and balance tests and a clinical procedure for primary reflex persistence. The dyslexia group had significant reading efficiency and inattention problems, as well as significantly more difficulties on specific tests of balance and primary reflex persistence. Regression analyses revealed that inattention, balance, and primary reflex persistence were unique predictors of reading efficiency. An individual profile analysis also revealed that 75% of the dyslexic students experienced at least one type of significant motor/balance difficulty (lowest 5 percentiles) relative to their peers. The findings suggest that levels of motor/balance problems in university students with dyslexia have been underestimated in previous research.

In this study, we present an analysis of interviews with parents and teachers in order to understand the lived experience of families and teachers trying to support children with written language difficulties. Within these accounts, the value of a dyslexia diagnosis is examined in practice. Nineteen parents and 20 educators were interviewed, including four parents who completed additional interviews 4 years after their original accounts. Our analysis indicated that dyslexia is rendered largely invisible in our sample of English schools, with staff frequently reluctant to fully acknowledge it. The analysis suggests mechanisms that appear to underpin successful support or harm to students. An important feature was the role and recognition of diagnosis in increasing the visibility of children's needs. Without recognition and understanding, support was inconsistent and ineffectual.

Targeting research towards areas that matter to dyslexic people and their families is essential for improving dyslexic people's lives. However, we do not know what the dyslexia community's research priorities are and whether they align with current research funding. We categorised previous funding for dyslexia research in the United Kingdom and considered how this aligns with community research priorities, using multiple methods and a participatory approach. We identified that the vast majority (78%) of funding has been spent on research into biology, brain and cognition. Through seven focus groups (n = 37), dyslexic adults and/or family members/carers of dyslexic children expressed that this balance needs redressing, and we identified four important areas for future research, informed by lived experiences. Finally, 436 members of the dyslexia community ranked the importance of research topics in a survey. The top five priorities related to training teachers and professionals, educational supports and interventions, mental health and self-esteem, making services and spaces more inclusive and cognition. Research into genes and risk factors was less prioritised. These results provide a point of reference for researchers and funders to align future research funding with the dyslexia community's priorities so that it can be of translational benefit.

Dyslexia is one of the most common language-based learning disabilities. Teaching a second language (L2) to dyslexic students is still a contested issue among educators. Teachers' knowledge and beliefs about dyslexia play an important role in the successful inclusion of these students in L2 classrooms. The current study investigated the knowledge and beliefs of Turkish second language teachers (SLTs) about dyslexia. Data were collected from 150 participants using the Knowledge and Beliefs About Developmental Dyslexia Scale (KBDDS). The findings revealed that Turkish SLTs possess a moderate level of knowledge about dyslexia, with notable strengths in understanding the need for individualised instruction and rejecting common myths, such as the belief that dyslexia is linked to laziness or low intelligence. However, several misconceptions persist, including the belief that dyslexia primarily results from visual processing issues. Female teachers and those with less than 11 years of teaching experience demonstrated significantly higher levels of knowledge. The study highlights the need for targeted professional development that builds on teachers' existing strengths while addressing areas of misunderstanding. Further research is recommended to explore the impact of teacher knowledge on dyslexic students' learning outcomes in L2 classrooms.

Previous studies have suggested that adults with dyslexia do not enjoy reading, based on data from trait-based questionnaires. This study uses state-based measures of reading to offer greater insight into different aspects of motivation, including liking and wanting. In a new paradigm sensitive to dynamic changes in reading enjoyment, adults with dyslexia (n = 59) and without dyslexia (n = 59) read 24 book extracts, rated their enjoyment and answered a question about the extract. Subsequently, participants decided whether to accept a cost (e.g., 3–6 s wait) to read the next paragraph. We also collected traditional trait-based measures of enjoyment. While neurotypical adults had higher trait-based reading enjoyment, average state-based reading enjoyment did not differ between groups. The relationship between high enjoyment states and subsequent benefits was altered in dyslexia. While heightened states of enjoyment increased the likelihood of continuing to read, this was attenuated in adults with dyslexia. In neurotypical adults, high states of enjoyment increased the likelihood of answering the question about the text correctly; this relationship did not hold in adults with dyslexia. Our findings shed light on how links between intrinsic value and subsequent motivation are altered in adults with dyslexia, suggesting that reading enjoyment can drive reading engagement but not comprehension.

This paper discusses the findings of a Delphi study in which dyslexia experts, including academics, specialist teachers, educational psychologists, and individuals with dyslexia, were asked for their agreement with a set of key statements about defining and identifying dyslexia: why it should be assessed and how and when this assessment should be conducted. Two rounds of survey responses provided a vehicle for moving towards consensus on how to assess for dyslexia. Forty-two consensus statements were ultimately accepted. Findings suggested that assessment practice should take account of risks to the accurate identification of dyslexia. An assessment model, with guidelines for assessors, is presented, based on the Delphi's findings. This hypothesis-testing model requires assessors to investigate and weigh up the factors most likely to result in an accurate assessment before reaching conclusions, assigning terminology, and making recommendations for intervention and management.

Difficulties in both duration and beat-based time perception are common in individuals with dyslexia (DD). It is also known that internalised beat cues may aid in duration processing. This study investigated whether the difficulties in duration processing among DD stem from their inability to utilise internal beat cues. Participants with and without dyslexia estimated intervals ranging from 500 ms to 10 s. In the beat cue condition, participants listened to a sequence of 500 ms beats before the interval, and in the no beat cue condition, they were exposed to silence while EEG was recorded. Interestingly, the two groups did not differ in duration estimation performance, but they did differ in their utilisation of beat cues, with DD showing less sensitivity to these, whether the impact was negative (cues before shorter intervals) or positive (before longer intervals). Brainwave entrainment to the target frequency was significantly higher compared with entrainment to a non-target frequency, and cross-group differences were null. Our findings suggest that DD may have difficulties either in retaining the beat when it is no longer audible, or in using the internalised beat for duration estimation. Nevertheless, they can achieve comparable accuracy to neurotypical adults, possibly through compensatory strategies.

In Australia, a broad range of terms are used when discussing children and young people with a specific learning disorder (SLD). However, little is known about how SLD-related terminology is perceived by adults with an SLD, parents of children with an SLD and the professionals who support them. The purpose of this study was to identify any SLD-related preferred terms and explore factors which may influence these preferences. Data were collected from 177 participants via an online survey which asked them to rate how much they liked each term from a provided list and why. Results showed that clear language preferences do exist amongst dyslexic adults, parents and professionals, with dyslexia/dysgraphia/dyscalculia, dyslexic/dysgraphic/dyscalculic, person with dyslexia/dysgraphia/ dyscalculia and challenges being the most liked terms whilst learning disability, learning disabled, impairment, deficit, weakness and person with a learning disability were amongst the least liked terms. A narrative synthesis revealed that participants' language preferences are largely dependent on the context and intent of communication, generating six key themes. This research offers clear implications on how society embraces strengths and diversity, including language use, and the impact this can have on individuals with SLDs.

The Adult Reading History Questionnaire (ARHQ) is a popular instrument for screening dyslexia in adults. Yet, there is no evidence suggesting its applicability in Chinese. The present study aims to develop a Chinese Adult Reading History Questionnaire (Chinese-ARHQ) and to assess its validity among Chinese adults. A total of 2439 Chinese adults completed the questionnaire of Chinese-ARHQ with 2234 questionnaires valid for further analysis (N_males = 825, M_age = 26.29 years, SD_age = 9.12). Among these participants, 184 completed the questionnaire twice and 221 completed reading-related tests. Results showed that the Chinese-ARHQ had good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.88), and the test–retest reliability was 0.81. Three factors (current reading, dyslexia symptoms and memory) were extracted through exploratory factor analysis. The scores of Chinese-ARHQ and its factors were both related to reading and phonological skills, revealing the good criterion validity of the questionnaire. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed that the optimal threshold for the Chinese-ARHQ was 0.36 with a sensitivity of 83.3% and a specificity of 75.9%. Additionally, adults screened by the Chinese-ARHQ (> 0.36) performed worse in reading and phonological awareness, further validating the Chinese-ARHQ as a reliable screening tool for Chinese dyslexia in adults.