<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com">
<title>Journal of Learning Disabilities RSS feed -- OnlineFirst Articles</title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com</link>
<description>Journal of Learning Disabilities RSS feed -- OnlineFirst Articles</description>
<prism:publicationName>Journal of Learning Disabilities</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0022-2194</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345017v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345011v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345018v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345008v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345005v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345014v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345009v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345007v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345012v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345016v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409338743v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409335216v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409338744v1?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://ldx.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif">
<title>Journal of Learning Disabilities</title>
<url>http://ldx.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif</url>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345017v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Passageless Comprehension on the Nelson-Denny Reading Test: Well Above Chance for University Students]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345017v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The comprehension section of the <I>Nelson-Denny Reading Test</I> (NDRT) is widely used to assess the reading comprehension skills of adolescents and adults in the United States. In this study, the authors explored the content validity of the NDRT Comprehension Test (Forms G and H) by asking university students (with and without at-risk status for learning disorders) to answer the multiple-choice comprehension questions without reading the passages. Overall accuracy rates were well above chance for both NDRT forms and both groups of students. These results raise serious questions about the validity of the NDRT and its use in the identification of reading disabilities.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Coleman, C., Lindstrom, J., Nelson, J., Lindstrom, W., Gregg, K. N.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:17:31 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345017</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Passageless Comprehension on the Nelson-Denny Reading Test: Well Above Chance for University Students]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-23</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345011v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Detecting Children With Arithmetic Disabilities From Kindergarten: Evidence From a 3-Year Longitudinal Study on the Role of Preparatory Arithmetic Abilities]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345011v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>In a 3-year longitudinal study, 471 children were classified, based on their performances on arithmetic tests in first and second grade, as having persistent arithmetic disabilities (AD), persistent low achieving (LA), persistent typical achieving, inconsistent arithmetic disabilities (DF1), or inconsistent low achieving in arithmetic. Significant differences in the performances on the magnitude comparison in kindergarten (at age 5&ndash;6) were found between theAD and LA and between theAD and DF1 groups. Furthermore, the percentage of true-positive AD children (at age 7&ndash;8) correctly diagnosed in kindergarten by combination of procedural counting, conceptual counting, and magnitude comparison tasks was 87.50%. When composing clinical samples, researchers should pay attention when stipulating restrictive or lenient cutoffs for arithmetic disabilities and select children based on their scores in 2 consecutive years, because the results of studies on persistent low achievers or children with inconsistent disabilities cannot be generalized to children with persistent arithmetic disabilities.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stock, P., Desoete, A., Roeyers, H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:35:48 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345011</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Detecting Children With Arithmetic Disabilities From Kindergarten: Evidence From a 3-Year Longitudinal Study on the Role of Preparatory Arithmetic Abilities]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345018v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Second Language Learning Difficulties in Chinese Children With Dyslexia: What Are the Reading-Related Cognitive Skills That Contribute to English and Chinese Word Reading?]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345018v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This study examined the relations between reading-related cognitive skills and word reading development of Chinese children with dyslexia in their Chinese language (L1) and in English (L2).A total of 84 bilingual children&mdash;28 with dyslexia,28 chronological age (CA) controls, and 28 reading-level (RL) controls&mdash;participated and were administered measures of word reading, rapid naming, visual-orthographic skills, and phonological and morphological awareness in both L1 and L2. Children with dyslexia showed weaker performance than CA controls in both languages and had more difficulties in phonological awareness in English but not in Chinese. In addition, reading-related cognitive skills in Chinese contributed significantly to the ability to read English words, suggesting cross-linguistic transfer from L1 to L2. Results found evidence for different phonological units of awareness related to the characteristics of the different languages being learned, supporting the psycholinguistic grain size and linguistic coding differences hypotheses.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chung, K. K. H., Ho, C. S.-H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:40:41 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345018</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Second Language Learning Difficulties in Chinese Children With Dyslexia: What Are the Reading-Related Cognitive Skills That Contribute to English and Chinese Word Reading?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-06</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345008v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Children With and Without Learning Disabilities: A Comparison of Processes and Outcomes Following Group Counseling]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345008v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This study compared outcomes and processes in counseling groups of an expressive-supportive modality for children with learning disabilities (LD) and without them (NLD). Participants were 266 students (ages 10&ndash;18), all referred for emotional, social, and behavioral difficulties; of these, 123 were identified with LD and 143 were not. There were 40 groups in all&mdash;20 with LD children and 20 with NLD. Outcome variables included adjustment, social competence, and academic achievements. Process variables included bonding, group functioning, and client behavior. Analyses were nested using mixed models. Results indicated no differences in outcomes or process variables between populations except for academic achievements; some between-group differences were found in the effect of processes on outcomes. It was concluded that children with LD may be successfully treated in expressive-supportive counseling groups for their emotional and social difficulties.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Leichtentritt, J., Shechtman, Z.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:13:14 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345008</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Children With and Without Learning Disabilities: A Comparison of Processes and Outcomes Following Group Counseling]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-04</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345005v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Newborn Event-Related Potentials Predict Poorer Pre-Reading Skills in Children at Risk for Dyslexia]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345005v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Earlier results from the Jyv&auml;skyl&auml; Longitudinal Study of Dyslexia showed that newborn event-related potentials (ERPs) of children with and without familial risk for dyslexia were associated with receptive language and verbal memory skills between 2.5 and 5 years of age. We further examined whether these ERPs (responses to synthetic consonant-vowel syllables /ba/, /da/, /ga/; presented equiprobably with 3,910&ndash;7,285 ms interstimulus intervals) predict later pre-reading skills measured before the onset of school (6.5 years of age). In line with our earlier results, the at-risk children (<I>N</I> = 11) with atypical speech processing in the right hemisphere (a slower shift in polarity from positivity to negativity in responses to /ga/ at 540&ndash;630 ms) scored significantly lower in phonological skills, rapid naming, and letter knowledge than the control children (<I>N</I> = 10) without enhanced right hemispheric speech processing. These results further extend our earlier findings of newborn ERPs in predicting poorer language skills. These consistent differences in ERPs to speech sounds may have applications in the future for the early identification of children at risk for developmental language problems. This would facilitate well-directed intervention even before reading problems are typically diagnosed.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Guttorm, T. K., Leppanen, P. H. T., Hamalainen, J. A., Eklund, K. M., Lyytinen, H. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:13:13 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345005</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Newborn Event-Related Potentials Predict Poorer Pre-Reading Skills in Children at Risk for Dyslexia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-04</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345014v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Recognition, Expression, and Understanding Facial Expressions of Emotion in Adolescents With Nonverbal and General Learning Disabilities]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345014v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Children with nonverbal learning disabilities (NVLD) have been found to be worse at recognizing facial expressions than children with verbal learning disabilities (LD) and without LD. However, little research has been done with adolescents. In addition, expressing and understanding facial expressions is yet to be studied among adolescents with LD subtypes. This study examined abilities of adolescents with NVLD, with general learning disabilities (GLD), and without LD to recognize, express, and understand facial expressions of emotion. Adolescents were grouped into those with NVLD, with GLD, and without LD using the <I>Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children&ndash;Third Edition (short form)</I> and <I>Wide Range Achievement Test&ndash;Third Edition. </I>The adolescents completed neuropsychological, recognition, expression, and understanding measures. It is intriguing that the GLD group was significantly less accurate at recognizing and understanding facial expressions compared with the NVLD and NLD groups, who did not differ. Implications are explored with regard to the need to consider possible deficits in recognition and understanding of emotion in adolescents with LD in schools.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bloom, E., Heath, N.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:24:48 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345014</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Recognition, Expression, and Understanding Facial Expressions of Emotion in Adolescents With Nonverbal and General Learning Disabilities]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-10-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345009v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Defining Dyslexia]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345009v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>In 2007, the New Zealand Ministry of Education formally recognized the condition of dyslexia for the first time and has subsequently developed a working definition of the condition. The aim of this article is to draw on contemporary theory and research on reading development, reading difficulties, and reading intervention to describe what the authors believe are four key components of a definition of dyslexia/reading disability. They begin by discussing some preliminary factors that need to be considered in developing a definition of dyslexia. The authors then present the four components of their proposed definition, drawing on a framework for conceptualizing reading difficulties derived from the simple view of reading. They conclude by comparing their definition of dyslexia with the working definition put forward by the ministry.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tunmer, W., Greaney, K.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:17:14 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345009</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Defining Dyslexia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-10-15</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345007v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Identifying Preschool Children at Risk of Later Reading Difficulties: Evaluation of Two Emergent Literacy Screening Tools]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345007v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Emergent literacy skills are predictive of children&rsquo;s early reading success, and literacy achievement in early schooling declines more rapidly for children who are below-average readers. It is therefore important for teachers to identify accurately children at risk for later reading difficulty so children can be exposed to effective emergent literacy interventions. In this study, 176 preschoolers were administered two screening tools, the <I>Revised Get Ready to Read!</I> (GRTR-R) and the <I>Individual Growth and Development Indicators</I> (IGDIs), and a diagnostic measure at two time points. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses revealed that, at optimal cut scores, GRTR-R provided more accurate classification of children&rsquo;s overall emergent literacy skills than did IGDIs. However, neither measure was particularly good at classifying specific emergent literacy skills.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wilson, S. B., Lonigan, C. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:51:04 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345007</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Identifying Preschool Children at Risk of Later Reading Difficulties: Evaluation of Two Emergent Literacy Screening Tools]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-10-12</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345012v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[ADHD Symptomatology and Adjustment to College in China and the United States]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345012v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This study examined ADHD symptomatology and college adjustment in 420 participants&mdash;147 from the United States and 273 from China. It was hypothesized that higher levels of ADHD symptoms in general and the inattentive symptom group in particular would be related to decreased academic and social adjustment, career decision-making self-efficacy, and poorer study skills in both countries. Results generally supported the hypotheses, indicating that the difficulties associated with inattention are cross-cultural and not specific to the United States.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Norvilitis, J. M., Sun, L., Zhang, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 09:36:55 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345012</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[ADHD Symptomatology and Adjustment to College in China and the United States]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-24</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345016v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Rapid Automatized Naming and Immediate Memory Functions in Chinese Mandarin-Speaking Elementary Readers]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409345016v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The purpose of this study was to evaluate rapid automatized naming skills (RAN) and immediate memory processes in 243 Chinese Mandarin&ndash;speaking elementary readers (ranging from Grade 1 to Grade 5). For RAN subtests, the mean naming time decreased monotonically with grade level in good and average readers, and a similar trajectory was found in poor readers, even though they were generally slower in rapid naming. Regardless of grouping methods (counting all participants or counting good readers only), RAN Character emerged as a significant predictor of various Chinese reading measures. Different from classical findings in English readers indicating that RAN Number was a better correlate of reading than RAN Object, RAN Object outperformed RAN Number and became a significant predictor of Chinese reading speed and spelling, suggesting that the differences in predictive power of RAN tasks may be language specific. Comparison of memory profiles for good, average, and poor readers revealed that the patterns varied depending on mode of stimulus presentation or response. Poor readers performed poorly on subtests involving a visual component and did relatively better on subtests involving verbal cues only, whereas a reversed pattern was shown in the group of good readers. The findings were interpreted to suggest that good and poor Chinese readers may be essentially different in applying visual strategies and verbal mediation during visualverbal intra- and intermodal processing, and visual skills appear to be particularly important in reading of Chinese.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ding, Y., Richman, L. C., Yang, L.-y., Guo, J.-p.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:21:50 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409345016</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Rapid Automatized Naming and Immediate Memory Functions in Chinese Mandarin-Speaking Elementary Readers]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-21</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409338743v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Working Memory, Strategy Knowledge, and Strategy Instruction in Children With Reading Disabilities]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409338743v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Two experiments investigated the effects of strategy knowledge and strategy training on the working memory (WM) performance in children (ages 10&ndash;11) with and without reading disabilities (RD). Experiment 1 examined the relationship between strategy knowledge (stability of strategy choices) and WM performance as a function of initial, gain (cued), and maintenance conditions. WM performance was significantly improved for both groups under cued conditions; however, the performances of children with RD were inferior to those of children without RD across all memory conditions. Measures of WM capacity rather than strategy stability or processing efficiency best predicted reading comprehension performance. Experiment 2 assessed the effects of strategy training on WM performance by randomly assigning children to strategy instruction or control conditions. Significant improvements in WM performance occurred as a function of training conditions, but the residual WM differences between the reading groups remained. Although the results showed that stable strategy choices, cued performance, and strategy instruction significantly bolstered WM performance in children with RD, their overall WM performance, however, was constrained by capacity limitations.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Swanson, H. L., Kehler, P., Jerman, O.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:07:51 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409338743</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Working Memory, Strategy Knowledge, and Strategy Instruction in Children With Reading Disabilities]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-11</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409335216v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Project DyAdd: Phonological Processing, Reading, Spelling, and Arithmetic in Adults With Dyslexia or ADHD]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409335216v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Difficulties in phonological processing and reading that characterize developmental dyslexia have been suggested also to affect those with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, it is not known to what extent various intervening factors, such as low intelligence quotient or age, explain the observed difficulties. In this study, the authors investigated the domains of phonological processing, reading, spelling, and arithmetic in 110 adults (ages 18&ndash;55 years) in healthy control,dyslexia,and ADHD groups.The aim of the study was specifically to compare domain profiles of participants with ADHD to those in other groups.The results showed that participants with dyslexia had the most generalized difficulties. Participants with ADHD were the least affected, and their difficulties reflected less accurate performance. Furthermore, all the observed differences became nonsignificant when intelligence quotient was controlled for.This suggests that adult ADHD is not related to significant impairments in phonological processing or achievement.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Laasonen, M., Lehtinen, M., Leppamaki, S., Tani, P., Hokkanen, L.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 10:05:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409335216</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Project DyAdd: Phonological Processing, Reading, Spelling, and Arithmetic in Adults With Dyslexia or ADHD]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409338744v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Tip-of-the-Tongue and Word Retrieval Deficits in Dyslexia]]></title>
<link>http://ldx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0022219409338744v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Tip-of-the-tongue (TOT) responses on a picture-naming task were used to test the hypothesis that dyslexia involves phonological, but not semantic, processing deficits. Participants included 16 children with dyslexia and 31 control children between 8 and 10 years of age who did not differ in receptive vocabulary. As hypothesized, children with dyslexia demonstrated more TOTs and proportionally more errors in the phonological, but not semantic, step of word retrieval. Longer and low-frequency words also prompted more TOTs. The groups did not differ in phonological errors on a follow-up recognition task. The results provide evidence of text-independent, on-line phonological processing deficits in readers with dyslexia.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hanly, S., Vandenberg, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:21:16 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022219409338744</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Tip-of-the-Tongue and Word Retrieval Deficits in Dyslexia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Hammill Institute on Disabilities</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-08-03</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>