We compared three phonological processing components (phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming and phonological memory), verbal working memory, and attention control in terms of how well they predict the various aspects of reading: word recognition, pseudoword decoding, fluency and comprehension, in a mixed sample of 182 children ages 8–12 years. Participants displayed a wide range of reading ability and attention control. Multiple regression was used to determine how well the phonological processing components, verbal working memory, and attention control predict reading performance. All equations were highly significant. Phonological memory predicted word identification and decoding. In addition, phonological awareness and rapid automatized naming predicted every aspect of reading assessed, supporting the notion that phonological processing is a core contributor to reading ability. Nonetheless, phonological processing was not the only predictor of reading performance. Verbal working memory predicted fluency, decoding and comprehension, and attention control predicted fluency. Based upon our results, when using Baddeley’s model of working memory it appears that the phonological loop contributes to basic reading ability, whereas the central executive contributes to fluency and comprehension, along with decoding. Attention control was of interest as some children with ADHD have poor reading ability even if it is not sufficiently impaired to warrant diagnosis. Our finding that attention control predicts reading fluency is consistent with prior research which showed sustained attention plays a role in fluency. Taken together, our results suggest that reading is a highly complex skill that entails more than phonological processing to perform well.

No abstract

There are laterality effects in memory functioning in children/adolescents with focal epilepsy

Prior research has shown that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and epilepsy are frequently comorbid and that both disorders are associated with various attention and memory problems. Nonetheless, limited research has been conducted comparing the two disorders in one sample to determine unique versus shared deficits. Hence, we investigated differences in working memory and short-term and delayed recall between children with ADHD, focal epilepsy of mixed foci, comorbid ADHD/epilepsy and controls. Participants were compared on the Core subtests and the Picture Locations subtest of the Children’s Memory Scale (CMS). Results indicated that children with ADHD displayed intact verbal working memory and long-term memory (LTM), as well as intact performance on most aspects of short-term memory (STM). They performed worse than controls on Numbers Forward and Picture Locations, suggesting problems with focused attention and simple span for visual-spatial material. Conversely, children with epilepsy displayed poor focused attention and STM regardless of modality assessed, which affected encoding into LTM. The only loss over time was found for passages (Stories). Working memory was intact. Children with comorbid ADHD/epilepsy displayed focused attention and STM/LTM problems consistent with both disorders, having the lowest scores across the four groups. Hence, focused attention and visual-spatial span appear to be affected in both disorders, whereas additional STM/encoding problems are specific to epilepsy. Children with comorbid ADHD/epilepsy have deficits consistent with both disorders, with slight additive effects. This study suggests that attention and memory testing should be a regular part of the evaluation of children with epilepsy and ADHD.