Herrmann Julia A, Matyas Tom, Pratt Chris
School of Psychological Science, La Trobe University, Australia.
Dyslexia. 2006 Aug;12(3):195-221. doi: 10.1002/dys.324.
A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate whether specific reading disorder (SRD) groups demonstrate a deficit in using phonological recoding strategies. Thirty-four studies were reviewed that had compared the nonword reading performances of SRD groups with reading-level matched (RL) control groups. The average nonword reading difference between groups across the total number of studies was moderate (d = 0.65, N = 2865). Three predictors of the size of group differences in nonword reading ability were identified. Studies that used passage reading tests to match groups for reading level found significantly less evidence for nonword reading deficits than studies that used word-level reading accuracy tests. Secondly, there was a significant positive relationship between group differences in intelligence level (SRD-RL control group) and effect sizes. Finally, group differences in age showed a significant negative association with effect magnitudes. The mean age, reading level and intelligence level of groups did not significantly predict nonword reading outcomes. It was concluded that there was evidence for nonword reading deficits in SRD groups, consistent with the claim that deficient development of phonological recoding strategies is a leading cause of reading difficulties.
进行了一项荟萃分析，以调查特定阅读障碍（SRD）组在使用语音编码策略方面是否存在缺陷。回顾了34项研究，这些研究比较了SRD组与阅读水平匹配（RL）对照组的非单词阅读表现。在所有研究中，两组之间非单词阅读的平均差异适中（d = 0.65，N = 2865）。确定了非单词阅读能力组间差异大小的三个预测因素。与使用单词水平阅读准确性测试的研究相比，使用段落阅读测试来匹配阅读水平组的研究发现非单词阅读缺陷的证据明显更少。其次，智力水平（SRD-RL对照组）的组间差异与效应大小之间存在显著的正相关。最后，年龄的组间差异与效应大小呈显著负相关。各组的平均年龄、阅读水平和智力水平并不能显著预测非单词阅读结果。得出的结论是，有证据表明SRD组存在非单词阅读缺陷，这与语音编码策略发展不足是阅读困难的主要原因这一观点一致。
