| Title |
Is a cerebellar deficit the underlying cause of reading disabilities?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Dyslexia, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11881-011-0060-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shahrzad Irannejad, Robert Savage |
| Abstract |
This study investigated whether children with dyslexia differed in their performance on reading, phonological, rapid naming, motor, and cerebellar-related tasks and automaticity measures compared to reading age (RA)-matched and chronological age (CA)-matched control groups. Participants were 51 children attending mainstream English elementary schools in Quebec. All participants completed measures of IQ, word and nonword reading fluency, elision, nonword decoding, rapid naming, bead threading, peg moving, toe tapping, postural stability, and muscle tone. Results from both group contrasts and analyses at the individual case level did not provide support for claims of motor-cerebellar involvement in either typical or atypical reading acquisition. Results were more consistent with a phonological core process account of both typical reading and reading difficulty. Phonological deficits for children with dyslexia compared to RA-matched controls were, however, only evident in group contrasts. Findings thus also have important implications for identifying at-risk readers among their same-aged peers. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 87 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 35% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 35 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 9% |
| Linguistics | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 9% |
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 21 November 2018.
All research outputs
#7,454,427
of 22,789,566 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Dyslexia
#85
of 247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,153
of 242,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Dyslexia
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,789,566 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 242,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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