To assess the idea that mild neurological dysfunction, as evidenced by crossed eye hand preference patterns, interferes with the learning of reading skills, comparisons were made of reading readiness test results for 89 first grade children. Comparisons on the basis of sex and of eye hand preference patterns yielded no significant differences in levels of reading readiness. Findings suggest that minimal brain dysfunction theories may be unsuitable for explaining reading disability.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenC. W.Recent research on sex differences.Psychology Bulletin, 1935, 32, 343–354.
2.
BakwinH., and BakwinR. M.Clinical management of behavior disorders in children.Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co., 1960.
3.
BremerN.Do readiness tests predict success in reading?Elementary School Journal, 1959, 59, 222–224.
4.
CaseyT., and EttlingerG.The occasional “independence” of dyslexia and dysgraphia from dysphasia.Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 1960, 23, 228–236.
5.
CohnR.Delayed acquisition of reading and writing abilities in children: a neurological study.Archives of Neurology, 1961, 4, 153–164.
6.
DelacatoC. H.The treatment and prevention of reading problems.Springfield, Illinois: Charles C Thomas, 1959.
7.
DelacatoC. H.The diagnosis and treatment of speech and reading problems.Springfield, Illinois: Charles C Thomas, 1963.
8.
EttlingerG., and HurwitzL.Dyslexia and its associated disturbances.Neurology, 1962, 12, 477–480.
9.
GoldbergH. K., MarshallC., and SimsE.The role of brain damage in congenital dyslexia.American Journal of Ophthalmology, 1960, 50, 586–590.
10.
HeilmanA. W.Principles and practices of teaching reading.Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1961.
11.
KarlinR.The prediction of reading success and reading readiness tests.Elementary English, 1957, 35, 41–46.
12.
LeeJ. M., ClarkW. W., and LeeD. M.Measuring reading readiness.Elementary School Journal, 1934, 656–666.
13.
MorganW. P.A case of congenital word-blindness.British Medical Journal, 1896, 2, 1612–1614.
14.
OrtonS. T.An impediment to learning to read, a neurological explanation of the reading disability.School and Society, 1928, 28, 286–290. (a)
15.
OrtonS. T.A physiological theory of reading disability and stuttering in children.New England Journal of Medicine, 1928, 199, 1046–1052. (b)
16.
OrtonS. T.Specific reading disability—strepho-symbolia.Journal of the American Medical Association, 1928, 90, 1095–1099. (c)
17.
OrtonS. T.Certain failures in the acquisition of written language: their bearing on the problem of cerebral dominance.Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 1929, 22, 841–850.
18.
OrtonS. T.Reading, writing and speech problems in children.New York: W. W. Norton, 1937.
19.
PenfieldH., HecaenG., BertrandC., and MalmoR.Syndrome of apractognosia due to lesions of the minor cerebral hemisphere.Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 1956, 75, 400–434.
20.
SilverA., and HaginR.Specific reading disability: follow-up studies.American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1964, 34, 95–102.
21.
ZangwillO. L.Dyslexia in relation to cerebral dominance. In MoneyJohn (Ed.), Reading disability: progress and research needs in dyslexia.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1962, 103–114.
