| Title |
Spelling deficits in dyslexia: evaluation of an orthographic spelling training
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Dyslexia, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11881-010-0035-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elena Ise, Gerd Schulte-Körne |
| Abstract |
Orthographic spelling is a major difficulty in German-speaking children with dyslexia. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an orthographic spelling training in spelling-disabled students (grade 5 and 6). In study 1, ten children (treatment group) received 15 individually administered weekly intervention sessions (60 min each). A control group (n = 4) did not receive any intervention. In study 2, orthographic spelling training was provided to a larger sample consisting of a treatment group (n = 13) and a delayed treatment control group (n = 14). The main criterion of spelling improvement was analyzed using an integrated dataset from both studies. Repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed that gains in spelling were significantly greater in the treatment group than in the control group. Statistical analyses also showed significant improvements in reading (study 1) and in a measure of participants' knowledge of orthographic spelling rules (study 2). The findings indicate that an orthographic spelling training enhances reading and spelling ability as well as orthographic knowledge in spelling-disabled children learning to spell a transparent language like German. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 111 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 23% |
| Unknown | 17 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 37 | 32% |
| Social Sciences | 26 | 23% |
| Linguistics | 7 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 13% |
| Unknown | 22 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 April 2015.
All research outputs
#7,451,284
of 22,780,165 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Dyslexia
#85
of 247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,563
of 95,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Dyslexia
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 247 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 95,077 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them