Rapid Naming and Phonemic Awareness in Children With Reading Disabilities and/or Specific Language Impairment: Differentiating Processes?

Abstract

In studying RD and SLI, this research indicates that it is important to distinguish between RD-only, SLI-only, and comorbid groups. The comorbid group shows additive effects of both disorders.

Understanding Word Reading Difficulties in Children With SLI

“…These studies have further provided clear evidence that children with SLI+DYS display deficits in phonological skills, using tasks measuring phonological awareness, nonword repetition, and rapid automatized naming (RAN), among others (Baird et al, 2011; Bishop et al, 2009; De Groot et al, 2015; Eisenmajer et al, 2005; Fraser et al, 2010; Kelso et al, 2007; McArthur & Castles, 2013; Ramus et al, 2013). However, the evidence remains somewhat mixed regarding the status of phonological processing skills for children with SLI-only.…”

“…Subsequent studies have provided converging evidence for the existence of SLI+DYS and SLI-only subgroups (Baird, Slonims, Simonoff, & Dworzynski, 2011; Bishop, McDonald, Bird, & Hayiou-Thomas, 2009; De Groot, Van den Bos, Van der Meulen, & Minnaert, 2015; Eisenmajer, Ross, & Pratt, 2005; Fraser, Goswami, & Conti-Ramsden, 2010; Kelso, Fletcher, & Lee, 2007; McArthur & Castles, 2013; Ramus, Marshall, Rosen, & van der Lely, 2013). Most of the studies included participants with a wide range of chronological ages (e.g., 7–12 years or 6–16 years of age), and with the exception of Bishop et al (2009), all of these studies involved clinically-referred or convenience samples and only one assessment time point.…”

“…Kelso et al (2007) also found that SLI-only demonstrated significantly better phonological awareness than SLI+DYS, but their study did not include a TD control group. Three studies (De Groot et al, 2015; Fraser et al 2010; Ramus et al, 2013) found that children with SLI-only displayed mean scores that were significantly better than children with SLI+DYS but significantly worse than TD children. Similarly, mixed results were observed across studies for nonword repetition and RAN tasks.…”

Does the Relation between Rapid Automatized Naming and Reading Depend on Age or on Reading Level? A Behavioral and ERP Study

“…Some authors however suggested that different groups of poor readers can be distinguished among typically developing learners on the basis of their level of performance in reading (i.e. −2 vs. −1 standard deviation from the mean) and/or of associated features (i.e., poor readers showing a single PA or RAN deficit vs. those with a deficit in both PA and RAN; Cronin, 2013 ; de Groot et al, 2015 ). In fact, considerable inter-individual differences have been reported in skills associated with reading, such as PA, phonological short-term memory (PSTM), and RAN (Mann et al, 1989 ; Gathercole and Baddeley, 1993 ; Caravolas et al, 2001 ; Kirby et al, 2010 ).…”

Rapid Automatic Naming Performance of Young Spanish–English Speaking Children

“…Given the predictive relationship between RAN and reading fluency, it is not surprising that RAN shows good construct validity in terms of differentiating children with and without language learning impairments. In previous studies, children with dyslexia generally demonstrate RAN performance that is more than one standard deviation below the norm, and RAN has differentiated children with typical and atypical oral language development [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34].…”