Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Learning Disabilities
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Naglieri, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Reardon, S. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Naglieri, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Reardon, S. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Traditional IQ Is Irrelevant to Learning Disabilities—Intelligence Is Not

Jack A. Naglieri

The Ohio State University

Sean M. Reardon

South-West City Schools located in the Columbus, Ohio

This investigation examined the relationship between intelligence and phonological coding when ability was redefined according to the Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, Successive (PASS) cognitive processing model. This study directly tested the hypothesis that traditional IQ tests may be irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities, but a different theory of intelligence may be more sensitive to deficiencies related to reading failure. Normally achieving students (n=30) and students with reading disabilities (n=30) ranging in age from 7.7 years to 15.3 years (mean = 11.9 years, SD = 2.4 years) were administered measures of the PASS cognitive processes, the Woodcock-Johnson Pyscho-Educational Battery-Revised pseudoword reading, and the Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised (WRAT-R) reading recognition tests. Results showed that the sample with reading disabilities earned significantly lower scores on the WRAT-R Reading (mean = 69.3) than the nondisabled subjects (mean = 91.4) and, similarly, on pseudowords those with reading problems earned a mean of 78.9 while the nondisabled earned a mean of 96.3. For the sample with reading disabilities, pseudoword reading scores were significantly predicted by successive processing scores (R 2 = .267), but no other processing variable added to the prediction; successive scores (R2 = .212) and the combination of successive and planning (R2 = .296) were significant predictors of WRAT-R Reading scores.

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 26, No. 2, 127-133 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/002221949302600205
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Learn DisabilHome page
J. P. Das, R. K. Mishra, and J. R. Kirby
Cognitive Patterns of Children with Dyslexia: A Comparison Between Groups with High and Average Nonverbal Intelligence
J Learn Disabil, April 1, 1994; 27(4): 235 - 242.
[PDF]