The double-deficit hypothesis of developmental dyslexia proposes that deficits in phonological processing and naming speed represent independent sources of dysfunction in dyslexia. The present article is a review of the evidence for the double-deficit hypothesis, including a discussion of recent findings related to the hypothesis. Studies in this area have been characterized by variability in methodology— how dyslexia is defined and identified, and how dyslexia subtypes are classified. Such variability sets limitations on the extent to which conclusions may be drawn with respect to the double-deficit hypothesis. Furthermore, the literature is complicated by the persistent finding that measures of phonological processing and naming speed are significantly correlated, resulting in a statistical artifact that makes it difficult to disentangle the influence of naming speed from that of phonological processing. Longitudinal and intervention studies of the double-deficit hypothesis are needed to accumulate evidence that investigates a naming speed deficit that is independent of a phonological deficit for readers with dyslexia. The existing evidence does not support a persistent core deficit in naming speed for readers with dyslexia.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allor, J.H. (2002). The relationships of phonemic awareness and rapid naming to reading development. Learning Disability Quarterly , 25, 47—57.
2.
Badian, N.A. (1997). Dyslexia and the double deficit hypothesis. Annals of Dyslexia, 47, 69—87.
3.
Blachman, B. (1984). The relationship of rapid naming ability and language analysis skills to kindergarten and first grade reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 610—622.
4.
Bowers, P.G., & Swanson, L.B. (1991). Naming speed deficits in reading disability: Multiple measures of a singular process. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 51, 195—219.
5.
Bowers, P.G., & Wolf, M. (1993). Theoretical links among naming speed, precise timing mechanisms and orthographic skill in dyslexia. Reading and Writing, 5, 69—85.
6.
Chiappe, P., Siegel, L.S., & Wade-Woolley, L. (2002). Linguistic diversity and the development of reading skills. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 369—400.
7.
Chiappe, P., Stringer, R., Siegel, L.S., & Stanovich, K.E. (2002). Why the timing deficit hypothesis does not explain reading disability in adults. Reading and Writing, 15, 73—107.
8.
Compton, D.L., DeFries, J.C., & Olson, R.K. (2001). Are RAN and phonological awareness deficits additive in reading disabled individuals?Dyslexia ( Chichester, UK), 7, 125—149.
9.
Deeney, T., Wolf, M., & O'Rourke, A.G. (2001). “I like to take my own sweet time”: Case study of a child with naming-speed deficits and reading disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 35, 145— 155.
10.
Denckla, M.B. (1972). Color naming deficits in dyslexic boys. Cortex, 8, 164—176.
11.
Denckla, M.B., & Cutting, L.E. (1999). History and significance of Rapid Automatized Naming. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 29— 42.
12.
Denckla, M.B., & Rudel, R. (1974). Rapid “automatized” naming of pictured objects, colors, letters, and numbers by normal children. Cortex, 10, 186—202.
13.
Denckla, M.B., & Rudel, R. (1976a). Naming of object-drawing by dyslexic and other learning disabled children. Brain andLanguage, 3, 1—15.
14.
Denckla, M.B., & Rudel, R. (1976b). Rapid “automatized” naming (R.A.N.): Dyslexia differentiated from other learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 14, 471—479.
15.
Fawcett, A.J., & Nicolson, R.I. (1994). Naming speed in children with dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 641—646.
16.
Felton, R.H., & Brown, I.S. (1990). Phonological processes as predictors of specific reading skills in children at-risk for reading failure. Reading and Writing, 2, 39—59.
17.
Fletcher, J.M. (1992). The validity of distinguishing children with language and learning disabilities according to discrepancy with IQ. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 546—548.
18.
Hammill, D.D., Mather, N., Allen, E.A., & Roberts, R. (2002). Using semantics, grammar, phonology, and rapid naming tasks to predict word identification. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 121—136.
19.
Karlsen, B., & Gardner, E. (1994). Stanford diagnostic reading test. San Francisco: Harcourt Brace.
20.
Lesaux, N.K., & Siegel, L.S. (2003). The development of reading in children who speak English as a second language. Developmental Psychology, 39, 1005—1019.
21.
Levy, B.A., Bourassa, D.C., & Horn, C. (1999). Fast and slow namers: Benefits of segmentation and whole word training. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology , 73, 115—138.
22.
Lovett, M.W., Steinbach, K.A., & Frijters, J.C. (2000). Remediating the core deficits of developmental reading disability: A double-deficit perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 334—358.
23.
Lyon, G.R., Fletcher, J.M., Shaywitz, S.E., Shaywitz, B.A., Torgesen, J.K., Wood, F.B., et al. (2001). Rethinking learning disabilities. In C. E. Finn, A. J. Rotherham, and C. R. Hokanson (Eds.), Rethinking special education for a new century (pp. 259— 287). Washington, DC: Fordham Foundation.
24.
Manis, F.R., Doi, L.M., & Bhadha, B. (2000). Naming speed, phonological awareness, and orthographic knowledge in second graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 33, 325—333, 374.
25.
Manis, F.R., Seidenberg, M.S., & Doi, L.M. (1999). See Dick RAN: Rapid naming and the longitudinal prediction of reading subskills in first and second graders. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 129—157.
26.
McBride-Chang, C., & Manis, F.R. (1996). Structural invariance in the associations of naming speed, phonological awareness, and verbal reasoning in good and poor readers: A test of the double deficit hypothesis. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8, 323—339.
Meyer, M.S., Wood, F.B., Hart, L.A., & Felton, H. (1998). Selective predictive value of rapid automatized naming in poor readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 106—117.
30.
Morris, R.D., Stuebing, K.K., Fletcher, J.M., Shaywitz, S.E., Lyon, G.R., Shankweiler, D.P., et al. (1998). Subtypes of reading disability: Variability around a phonological core. Journal of Educational Psychology , 90, 347—373.
31.
Neuhaus, G.F., & Swank, P.R. (2002). Understanding the relations between RAN letter subtest components and word reading in first-grade students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 156—174.
32.
Pennington, B.F., Cardoso-Martins, C., Green, P.A., & Lefly, D. (2001). Comparing the phonological and double deficit hypotheses for developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14, 707—755.
33.
Rosner, J., & Simon, D. (1971). The auditory analysis test: An initial report . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 4, 384—392.
34.
Schatschneider, C., Carlson, C.D., Francis, D.J., Foorman, B.R., & Fletcher, J.M. (2002). Relationship of rapid automatized naming and phonological awareness in early reading development: Implications for the double-deficit hypothesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 35, 245—256.
35.
Siegel, L.S. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 469—478, 486.
36.
Siegel, L.S. (1992). An evaluation of the discrepancy definition of dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 618—629.
37.
Siegel, L.S. (1999). Issues in the definition and diagnosis of learning disabilities: A perspective on Guckenberger v. Boston University. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 304—319.
38.
Stanovich, K.E., & Siegel, L.S. (1998). The role of IQ in the diagnosis of reading disorders: The quest for a subtype based on aptitude/achievement discrepancy. In J. Rispens, T. A. van Yperen, & W. Yule (Eds.), Perspectives on the classification of specific developmental disorders (pp. 105— 136). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
39.
Sunseth, K., & Bowers, P.G. (2002). Rapid naming and phonemic awareness: Contributions to reading, spelling and orthographic knowledge. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 401—429.
40.
Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Burgess, S., & Hecht, S. (1997). Contributions of phonological awareness and rapid automatic naming ability to the growth of word-reading skills in second-to fifth-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 161—185.
41.
Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D.M., Sipay, E.R., Small, S.G., Pratt, A., Chen, R., et al. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor students: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experimental deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology , 88, 601—638.
42.
Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D., & Lyon, G.R. (2000). Differentiating between difficult to remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ-discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 33, 223—238.
43.
Vukovic, R.K., Lesaux, N.K., & Siegel, L.S. (2003, June). An investigation of the double-deficit hypothesis in a longitudinal study of reading development. Poster presented at the Scientific Studies of Reading Annual Conference, Boulder, CO.
44.
Wagner, R.K., & Torgesen, J.K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin,101, 192—212.
45.
Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K., & Rashotte, C.A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processing . Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
46.
Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K., Laughon, P., Simmons, K., & Rashotte, C.A. (1993). Development of young readers' phonological processing abilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 83—103.
47.
Wilkinson, G.S. (1993). The wide range achievement test (3rd ed.). Wilmington, DE: Jastak.
48.
Wolf, M. (1991). Naming speed and reading: The contribution of the cognitive neurosciences. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 123—141.
49.
Wolf, M. (1999). What time may tell: Towards a new conceptualization of developmental dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 3—28.
50.
Wolf, M., Bally, H., & Morris, R. (1986). Automaticity, retrieval processes, and reading: A longitudinal study in average and impaired readers. Child Development, 57, 988—1000.
51.
Wolf, M., & Bowers, P.G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 415—438.
52.
Wolf, M., Bowers, P.G., & Biddle, K. (2000). Naming-speed processes, timing, and reading: A conceptual review. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 387—407.
53.
Wolf, M., Miller, L., & Donnelly, K. (2000). Retrieval, Automaticity, Vocabulary Elaboration, Orthography (RAVE-O): A comprehensive, fluency-based reading intervention program. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 375—386.
54.
Wolf, M., O'Rourke, A.G., Gidney, C., Lovett, M., Cirino, P., & Morris, R. (2002). The second deficit: An investigation of the independence of phonological and naming-speed deficits in developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 43—72.
