Toledo Piza Carolina M J, de Macedo Elizeu C, Miranda Monica C, Bueno Orlando F A
Psychobiology Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo São Paulo, Brazil.
Psychology Department, Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie São Paulo, Brazil.
Front Psychol. 2014 Jul 31;5:837. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00837. eCollection 2014.
The analysis of cognitive processes underpinning reading and writing skills may help to distinguish different reading ability profiles. The present study used a Brazilian reading and writing battery to compare performance of students with dyslexia with two individually matched control groups: one contrasting on reading competence but not age and the other group contrasting on age but not reading competence. Participants were 28 individuals with dyslexia (19 boys) with a mean age of 9.82 (SD ± 1.44) drawn from public and private schools. These were matched to: (1) an age control group (AC) of 26 good readers with a mean age of 9.77 (SD ± 1.44) matched by age, sex, years of schooling, and type of school; (2) reading control group (RC) of 28 younger controls with a mean age of 7.82 (SD ± 1.06) matched by sex, type of school, and reading level. All groups were tested on four tasks from the Brazilian Reading and Writing Assessment battery ("BALE"): Written Sentence Comprehension Test (WSCT); Spoken Sentence Comprehension Test (OSCT); Picture-Print Writing Test (PPWT 1.1-Writing); and the Reading Competence Test (RCT). These tasks evaluate reading and listening comprehension for sentences, spelling, and reading isolated words and pseudowords (non-words). The dyslexia group scored lower and took longer to complete tasks than the AC group. Compared with the RC group, there were no differences in total scores on reading or oral comprehension tasks. However, dyslexics presented slower reading speeds, longer completion times, and lower scores on spelling tasks, even compared with younger controls. Analysis of types of errors on word and pseudoword reading items showed students with dyslexia scoring lower for pseudoword reading than the other two groups. These findings suggest that the dyslexics overall scores were similar to those of younger readers. However, specific phonological and visual decoding deficits showed that the two groups differ in terms of underpinning reading strategies.
对支撑读写技能的认知过程进行分析，可能有助于区分不同的阅读能力概况。本研究使用了一套巴西读写测试组合，将诵读困难学生的表现与两个个体匹配的对照组进行比较：一组在阅读能力上有差异但年龄相同，另一组在年龄上有差异但阅读能力相同。参与者为28名患有诵读困难的个体（19名男孩），平均年龄为9.82岁（标准差±1.44），来自公立和私立学校。他们与以下两组进行匹配：（1）一个年龄对照组（AC），由26名阅读能力良好的学生组成，平均年龄为9.77岁（标准差±1.44），在年龄、性别、受教育年限和学校类型方面进行匹配；（2）一个阅读对照组（RC），由28名年龄较小的对照组学生组成，平均年龄为7.82岁（标准差±1.06），在性别、学校类型和阅读水平方面进行匹配。所有组都接受了巴西读写评估测试组合（“BALE”）中的四项任务测试：书面句子理解测试（WSCT）；口语句子理解测试（OSCT）；图片-印刷写作测试（PPWT 1.1-写作）；以及阅读能力测试（RCT）。这些任务评估句子的阅读和听力理解、拼写以及孤立单词和假词（非单词）的阅读。诵读困难组的得分低于AC组，完成任务的时间也更长。与RC组相比，阅读或口语理解任务的总分没有差异。然而，诵读困难者的阅读速度较慢，完成时间较长，拼写任务的得分较低，即使与年龄较小的对照组相比也是如此。对单词和假词阅读项目的错误类型分析表明，诵读困难学生在假词阅读方面的得分低于其他两组。这些发现表明，诵读困难者的总体得分与年龄较小的读者相似。然而，特定的语音和视觉解码缺陷表明，两组在支撑阅读策略方面存在差异。
