MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.2466/pms.101.2.345-361

Медицинская библиотека · Perceptual and motor skills · 2005

Evaluating current deficit theories of poor reading: role of phonological processing, naming speed, balance automaticity, rapid verbal perception and working memory.

Savage Robert, Frederickson Norah, Goodwin Roz, Patni Ulla, Smith Nicola, Tuersley Louise

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

To clarify the nature of cognitive deficits experienced by poor readers, 9-10-yr.-old poor readers were matched against 9 chronological age and 9 younger reading age-matched controls screened and selected from regular classrooms. Poor readers performed significantly more poorly than chronological age-matched peers on digit naming speed, spoonerisms, and nonsense word reading. Poor readers were also significantly poorer than reading age-matched controls on nonword reading but were significantly better than reading age-matched controls on postural stability. Analyses of effect sizes were consistent with these findings, showing strong effects for digit naming speed, spoonerisms, and nonword reading. However, effect size analysis also suggested that poor readers experienced moderate difficulties with balance automatisation but did not show verbal speech perception deficits relative to either control

Для цитирования: Savage Robert, Frederickson Norah, Goodwin Roz, Patni Ulla, Smith Nicola, Tuersley Louise. Evaluating current deficit theories of poor reading: role of phonological processing, naming speed, balance automaticity, rapid verbal perception and working memory.. Perceptual and motor skills. 2005. DOI: 10.2466/pms.101.2.345-361.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.