Annals of Dyslexia最新文献

Excessive crowding in the visual periphery has been demonstrated in children with developmental dyslexia (DD). However, less is known about crowding in the fovea, even though foveal crowding is at least equally important, as reading is mostly accomplished through foveal vision. Here we used a special set of digit stimuli (Pelli fonts) to measure foveal crowding in DD and DD + ADHD children, and compared it to that in TD (typically developing) and ADHD children. We also used the Chinese reading acuity charts (C-READ) to assess the maximum reading speed and reading acuity, along with tests to evaluate cognitive attributes including phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, morphological awareness, and orthographic knowledge. The results indicate significantly stronger foveal crowding in the DD and DD + ADHD groups, as well as in the ADHD group, than in the TD group. Furthermore, the DD and DD + ADHD groups exhibited poorer maximum reading speed and reading acuity compared to the ADHD and TD groups. Within the two DD groups, the slower maximum reading speed and higher reading acuity can be predicted by stronger foveal crowding. In addition, the DD and DD + ADHD groups performed the worst in four cognitive skills, with the DD group showing negative correlations between foveal crowding and performances across all these skills. Our findings thus move beyond previously well-documented peripheral crowding in dyslexia, and the easy administration of the Pelli-font-based crowding test may be useful for early diagnosis of developmental dyslexia in young children.

While developmental dyslexia has been extensively studied in children, research on adults is still rather limited. This paper aims to bridge the gap in existing research by presenting the findings of a study that examined the reading and spelling skills of adults with dyslexia and assessed the effectiveness of a linguistic intervention designed to improve their literacy abilities. To address this issue, we first compared the profiles of 44 adults with dyslexia (age range: 16-30 y.o.) and 44 age-matched typical readers across tasks assessing reading, spelling, phonological awareness, morphological awareness and lexical access in Italian. The findings underscored pervasive impairments in dyslexia across all measured dimensions, reaffirming the persistent nature of language and literacy challenges into adulthood. In pursuit of the second objective, the study explored the potential for literacy skill improvement in adults with dyslexia through the implementation of a specialized intervention proposed to 24 dyslexic adults and delivered via a web application. The intervention program yielded positive outcomes in the experimental group, demonstrating significant improvements in word and text reading, spelling, and speed of phonological elaboration. This study, hence, contributes not only to our understanding of developmental dyslexia in adulthood but also emphasizes the tangible benefits of targeted linguistic interventions, thereby offering practical implications for the amelioration of literacy skills in this population.

This study examined six reading intervention teachers' implementation of the SPELL-Links to Reading and Writing intervention with students in Grades 2 and 3. The purpose was to explore the extent to which teachers who received a one-day training session without ongoing coaching support were able to implement the intervention with fidelity. It also aimed to better understand the determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators) of teachers' implementation and their perceptions related to the importance, feasibility, and effectiveness of the intervention. Data from four sources (implementation logs, implementation observations, interviews, and surveys) were collected and analyzed. Participating teachers did not implement the intervention at the intended dosage of 4 days per week, but they did demonstrate high adherence and quality on average. Several barriers to implementation were identified, including intervention training, intervention content and structure, compatibility with existing practices, and alignment with goals. Notable facilitators of implementation were teacher capability and peer support. Teachers had varying perceptions of the intervention, with neutral satisfaction on average. These findings indicate a need for further research on determinants of intervention implementation as they may be crucial in supporting teachers' implementation fidelity.

Early identification plays a crucial role in providing timely support to students with learning disabilities, such as dyslexia, in order to overcome their reading difficulties. However, there is significant variability in the methods used for identifying dyslexia. This study aimed to explore and understand the practices of dyslexia identification in the UK. A survey was conducted among 274 dyslexia professionals, including educational psychologists and dyslexia specialists, to investigate the types of assessments they employ, their approach to utilizing assessment data, their decision-making processes, and their conceptualization of dyslexia. Additionally, the study examined whether these professionals held any misconceptions or myths associated with dyslexia. Analysis of the survey data revealed substantial variability in how professionals conceptualize dyslexia, as well as variations in assessment methods. Furthermore, a significant proportion of the survey respondents subscribed to one or more misconceptions regarding dyslexia; the most common misconception identified among professionals was the belief that children with dyslexia read letters in reverse order. The findings highlight the need for standardized approaches to dyslexia identification and debunking prevailing misconceptions. The implications of these findings are discussed, emphasizing the importance of informed policy and practice in supporting students with dyslexia. Recommendations are provided to enhance consistency and accuracy in dyslexia identification, with the aim of facilitating early intervention and support for affected students.

Rapid automatized naming (RAN) has surged in popularity recently as an important indicator of reading difficulties, including dyslexia. Despite an extensive history of research on RAN, including recent meta-analyses indicating a unique contribution of RAN to reading above and beyond phonemic awareness, questions remain regarding RAN's relationship to reading. Specific questions exist regarding how PA mediates that relationship and how best to use data from RAN measures to identify risk for reading failure. Through multiple studies, we demonstrate that RAN is not merely subsumed by skills typically assessed when conducting universal screening for reading difficulties (i.e., phonemic segmentation fluency and letter naming fluency), but contributes unique information above and beyond these measures. Additionally, we discuss the process for the development of cut points for risk for Acadience RAN, along with guidance regarding how educators can interpret RAN scores as an indicator of risk for future reading difficulties. The results presented here support the idea that difficulties associated with RAN are not merely reflections of difficulties with other early literacy skills typically assessed during universal screening, but constitute separate and distinct difficulties that may precipitate later reading problems.