This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Stanovich, K. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Stanovich, K. E. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Dysrationalia

A New Specific Learning Disability

Keith E. Stanovich is a professor at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. His research interests are in the psychology of reading, reading disabilities, the cognitive consequences of literacy, critical thinking, and decision making. He has twice received the Albert J. Harris Award from the International Reading Association. He currently serves as the associate editor of the journal Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. Address: Keith E. Stanovich, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 252 Bloor St. West, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 1V6.

The concept of selective deficit is the foundation of most conceptual definitions of learning disability. Such definitions have tended to implicate the construct of intelligence in the conceptualization of learning disability and have led to the use of IQ test scores to operationalize the notion of aptitude-achievement discrepancy. The learning disabilities field is only beginning to grapple with the implications of its reliance on the concept of psychometrically defined intelligence. For example, discrepancy-based definitions of learning disabilities guarantee that such disabilities will become more or less prevalent depending on the comprehensiveness of the set of skills assessed on IQ tests. Unlike the vernacular concept of intelligence—which is quite broad—psychometric operationalizations reflect only a thin slice of the mental domain that might be considered cognitive. Thus, it is possible that we have not exhausted the potential set of discrepancy-based disabilities. As a demonstration proof, a new discrepancy-based disability category is proposed and defended in this paper. The disability is one that may force more careful consideration of the role that intelligence plays in conceptual and operational definitions of learning disabilities.

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 26, No. 8, 501-515 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/002221949302600803


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. L. Sparks Is There a "Disability" for Learning a Foreign Language? J Learn Disabil, December 1, 2006; 39(6): 544 - 557. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. E. Stanovich The Sociopsychometrics of Learning Disabilities J Learn Disabil, July 1, 1999; 32(4): 350 - 361. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. E. Jimenez Gonzalez and I. Hernandez Valle A Spanish Perspective on LD J Learn Disabil, May 1, 1999; 32(3): 267 - 275. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. W. Morgan, S. A. Sullivan, C. Darden, and N. Gregg Measuring the Intelligence of College Students with Learning Disabilities: A Comparison of Results Obtained on the WAIS-R and the KAIT J Learn Disabil, September 1, 1997; 30(5): 560 - 565. [Abstract] [PDF]