2009
DOI: 10.1007/s11145-009-9222-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to analyze possible gender-related differences in the prevalence of dyslexia. A cross-national comparison of Spain and Guatemala was conducted. Both countries speak the same language but have a different standard of living and educational level. A second purpose of this study was to analyze the cognitive profile of Guatemalan and Spanish males and females children with dyslexia. The log-linear analysis indicated that the number of dyslexics detected was different across the countr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
27
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
3
27
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the path models, gender predicted only 2-6% of the variance in the PISA measures. These findings suggest that the discussion regarding the practical relevance of boy-girl differences in reading is just (e.g., Hyde & Linn, 1988;Jimenez et al, 2011;McGeown et al, 2012;Moll et al, 2014). However, the finding that boys have a larger variance because of the large number of boys in the lowest tail of the skill distributions is also important (see also, e.g., Lange et al, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the path models, gender predicted only 2-6% of the variance in the PISA measures. These findings suggest that the discussion regarding the practical relevance of boy-girl differences in reading is just (e.g., Hyde & Linn, 1988;Jimenez et al, 2011;McGeown et al, 2012;Moll et al, 2014). However, the finding that boys have a larger variance because of the large number of boys in the lowest tail of the skill distributions is also important (see also, e.g., Lange et al, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Despite the widespread concern over boys' lag in reading, the debate on the size and reasons underlying the gap continues (e.g., Hyde, 2014;Watson, Kehler & Martino, 2010;White, 2007). Not all studies show clear or practically meaningful gender differences in reading (e.g., Hyde & Linn, 1988;McGeown, Goodwin, Henderson & Wright, 2012;White, 2007;Voyer & Voyer, 2014) or in frequency of reading difficulty (e.g., Jimenez et al, 2011;Moll, Kunze, Neuhoff, Bruder & Schulte-Körne, 2014).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sampling error associated with small studies could also produce considerable variability in apparent gender differences. With the exception of one large study conducted in Australia with data from approximately 1 million students (Wheldall & Limbrick, 2010), only a few studies have had sample sizes in the thousands (e.g., Flannery, Liederman, Daly, & Schultz, 2000; Jimenez et al, 2011; Miles et al, 1998; Rutter et al, 2004), and most studies have had small samples with fewer than 50 individuals with reading disability (e.g., Berger, Yule, & Rutter, 1975; Finucci & Childs, 1981; Jorm, Share, Matthews, & MacLean, 1986; Lewis, Hitch, & Walker, 1994; S. Shaywitz, Shaywitz, Fletcher, & Escobar, 1990).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, a recent study [23] provided little (1.4:1 male to female ratio) or no evidence for gender-related differences in the prevalence of reading disabilities in a transparent orthography.…”
Section: Prevalence Of Dyslexia In Spainmentioning
confidence: 98%