Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

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 Fawcett, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Maclagan, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fawcett, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Maclagan, F.
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?

Cerebellar Tests Differentiate Between Groups of Poor Readers With and Without IQ Discrepancy

Angela J. Fawcett

University of Sheffield, A.Fawcett{at}shef.ac.uk

Roderick I. Nicolson

University of Sheffield

Fiona Maclagan

University of Birmingham

A comprehensive test battery, including phonological, speed, motor and cerebellar tasks, was administered to the entire cohort of two schools for children with learning disabilities. Testing was undertaken blind without accessing the psychometric data on the children. Children were then allocated to a discrepancy group on the basis of their IQ, with the majority (n = 29) classified as nondiscrepant (IQ < 90) and a smaller set (n = 7), with IQ of at least 90, classified as discrepant (with dyslexia). Both groups showed significant deficits relative to age-matched controls on almost all the tests. On phonological, speed, and motor tasks, the nondiscrepant group were at least as severely impaired as the discrepant group. By contrast, on the cerebellar tests of postural stability and muscle tone, the nondiscrepant group performed significantly better than the children with dyslexia and close to the level of the controls. The findings indicate that cerebellar tests may prove a valuable method of differentiating between poor readers with and without IQ discrepancy. The findings are interpreted in terms of the cerebellar deficit hypothesis for dyslexia.

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 34, No. 2, 119-135 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/002221940103400203
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
R. Savage, V. Pillay, and S. Melidona
Rapid Serial Naming Is a Unique Predictor of Spelling in Children
J Learn Disabil, June 1, 2008; 41(3): 235 - 250.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Child NeurolHome page
M. Y. Kibby, J. B. Fancher, R. Markanen, and G. W. Hynd
A Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis of the Cerebellar Deficit Hypothesis of Dyslexia
J Child Neurol, April 1, 2008; 23(4): 368 - 380.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Learn DisabilHome page
R. D. Tiu Jr., L. A. Thompson, and B. A. Lewis
The Role of IQ in a Component Model of Reading
J Learn Disabil, October 1, 2003; 36(5): 424 - 436.
[Abstract] [PDF]