This study investigated how gifted children with dyslexia might be able to mask literacy problems and the role of possible compensatory mechanisms. The sample consisted of 121 Dutch primary school children that were divided over four groups (typically developing [TD] children, children with dyslexia, gifted children, gifted children with dyslexia). The test battery included measures of literacy (reading/spelling) and cognitive abilities related to literacy and language (phonological awareness [PA], rapid automatized naming [RAN], verbal short-term memory [VSTM], working memory [WM], grammar, and vocabulary). It was hypothesized that gifted children with dyslexia would outperform children with dyslexia on literacy tests. In addition, a core-deficit model including dyslexia-related weaknesses and a compensational model involving giftedness-related strengths were tested using Bayesian statistics to explain their reading/spelling performance. Gifted children with dyslexia performed on all literacy tests in between children with dyslexia and TD children. Their cognitive profile showed signs of weaknesses in PA and RAN and strengths in VSTM, WM, and language skills. Findings indicate that phonology is a risk factor for gifted children with dyslexia, but this is moderated by other skills such as WM, grammar, and vocabulary, providing opportunities for compensation of a cognitive deficit and masking of literacy difficulties.
AckermanP. L.BeierM. E.BoyleM. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs?Psychological Bulletin, 31, 30–60. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.30
2.
AllowayT. P. (2007). Automated Working Memory Assessment (AWMA). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pearson.
3.
AllowayT. P. (2009). Working memory, but not IQ, predicts subsequent learning in children with learning difficulties. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 25, 92–98. doi:10.1027/1015-5759.25.2.92
4.
AllowayT. P.AllowayR. G. (2010). Investigating the predictive roles of working memory and IQ in academic attainment. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 106, 20–29. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2009.11.003
5.
AllowayT. P.ElsworthM. (2012). An investigation of cognitive skills and behavior in high ability students. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 891–895. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.02.001
6.
AllowayT. P.GathercoleS. E.KirkwoodH.ElliotJ. (2009). The cognitive and behavioral characteristics of children with low working memory. Child Development, 80, 606–621. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01282.x
7.
AssoulineS. G.FoleyM.WhitemanC. (2010). Cognitive and psychosocial characteristics of gifted students with specific learning disabilities. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54, 102–115. doi:10.1177/001698620935597
8.
BireleyM.LanguisM.WilliamsonT. (1992). Physiological uniqueness: A new perspective on the learning disabled/gifted child. Roeper Review, 15, 101–108. doi:10.1080/02783199209553477
9.
BlomertL. (2006). Protocol dyslexie diagnostiek en behandeling [Protocol for diagnosis and treatment of dyslexia]. Maastricht, Netherlands: Faculteit Psychologie.
10.
BrodyL. E.MillsC. J. (1997). Gifted children with learning disabilities: A review of the issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 282–296. doi:10.1177/002221949703000304
11.
BrusB. T.VoetenM. J. M. (1999). Eén-minuut-test [One minute test]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Harcourt.
12.
CatronR. M.WingenbachN. (1986). Developing the potential of the gifted reader. Theory Into Practice, 25(2), 135–140.
13.
CattsH. W.GillispieM.LeonardL. B.KailR. V.MillerC. A. (2002). The role of speed of processing, rapid naming, and phonological awareness in reading achievement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 509–524. doi:10.1177/00222194020350060301
14.
ConwayA. R. A.CowanN.BuntingM. F.TherriaultD. J.MinkoffS. R. B. (2002). A latent variable analysis of working memory capacity, short-term memory capacity, processing speed, and general fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 30, 163–183. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(01)00096-4
15.
ConwayA. R. A.KaneM. J.EngleR. W. (2003). Working memory capacity and its relation to general intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 547–552. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.10.005
16.
DarkV. J.BenbowC. P. (1991). Differential enhancement of working memory with mathematical versus verbal precocity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 48–60. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.83.1.48
17.
EversA.EgberinkI. J. L.BraakM. S. L.FrimaR. M.VermeulenC. S. M.Van Vliet-MulderJ. C. (2009–2012). COTAN documentatie [COTAN documentation]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Boom.
18.
FoleyM.AllmonA.SieckB.StinsonR. D. (2011). Empirical investigation of twice-exceptionality: Where have we been and where are we going?Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 3–17. doi:10.1177/0016986210382575
19.
FrithU.WimmerH.LanderlK. (1998). Differences in phonological recoding in German- and English-speaking children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 31–54. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0201_2
GillJ. (2008). Bayesian methods: A social and behavioral sciences approach (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
22.
GriffithsY. M.SnowlingM. J. (2002). Predictors of exception word and nonword reading in dyslexic children: The severity hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 34–43. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.34
23.
HannahC. L.ShoreB. M. (2008). Twice-exceptional students’ use of metacognitive skills on a comprehension monitoring task. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 3–18. doi:10.1177/0016986207311156
24.
HatcherP. J.HulmeC. (1999). Phonemes, rhymes and intelligence as predictors of children’s responsiveness to remedial reading instruction: Evidence from a longitudinal intervention study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 130–153. doi:10.1006/jecp.1998.2480
25.
HohP. S. (2005). The linguistic advantage of the intellectually gifted child: An empirical study of spontaneous speech. Roeper Review, 27, 178–185. doi:10.1080/02783190509554313
26.
JohnsonJ.Im-BolterN.Pascual-LeoneJ. (2003). Development of mental attention in gifted and mainstream children: The role of mental capacity, inhibition, and speed of processing. Child Development, 74, 1594–1614. doi:10.1046/j.1467-8624.2003.00626.x
27.
KaplanS. (1999). Reading strategies for gifted readers. Teaching for High Potential, 1(2), 1–2.
28.
KassR. E.RafteryA. E. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773–795. doi:10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572
29.
KaufmanA. S.KaufmanJ. C.BalgopalR.McLeanJ. E. (1996). Comparison of three WISC-III short forms: Weighing psychometric, clinical, and practical factors. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 25, 97–105. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2501_11
30.
KleijnenR.BosmanA.De JongP.HennemanK.PasmanJ.PaternotteA. . . . WijnenF. (2008). Diagnose en Behandeling van Dyslexie. Brochure van de Stichting Dyslexie Nederland [Diagnosis and treatment of dyslexia. Brochure of the Dutch Dyslexia Foundation]. Bilthoven, Netherlands: Stichting Dyslexie Nederland.
31.
KlugkistI.LaudyO.HoijtinkH. (2005). Inequality constrained analysis of variance: A Bayesian approach. Psychological Methods, 10, 477–493. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.10.4.477
32.
KlugkistI.Van WeselF.BullensJ. (2011). Do we know what we test and do we test what we want to know?International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35, 550–560. doi:10.1177/0165025411425873
33.
KolkmanM. E.HoijtinkH. J. A.KroesbergenE. H.LesemanP. P. M (2013). The role of executive functions in numerical magnitude skills. Learning and Individual Differences, 24, 145–151. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.01.004
34.
KortW.SchittekatteM.BosmansM.CompaanE. L.DekkerP. H.VermeirG.VerhaegeP. (2005). WISC III-NL. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children III-NL. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pearson.
35.
KortW.SchittekatteM.CompaanE. (2010). CELF–4–NL. Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals–4–NL. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pearson.
36.
LovettB. J.LewandowskiL. J. (2006). Gifted students with learning disabilities: Who are they?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 515–527. doi:10.1177/00222194060390060401
37.
McCoachD. B.KehleT. J.BrayM. A.SiegleD. (2001). Best practices in the identification of gifted students with learning disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 403–411. doi:10.1002/pits.1029
38.
McCoachD. B.KehleT. J.BrayM. A.SiegleD. (2004). The identification of gifted students with learning disabilities: Challenging, controversies, and promising practices. In NewmanT. M.SternbergR. J. (Eds.), Students with both gifts and learning disabilities (pp. 31–48). New York, NY: Kluwer.
39.
MilesT. R.WheelerT. J.HaslumM. N. (2003). The existence of dyslexia without severe literacy problems. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 340–354. doi:10.1007/s11881-003-0016-2
40.
MulderJ.HoijtinkH.De LeeuwC. (2012). BIEMS: A Fortran 90 program for calculating Bayes factor for inequality and equality constrained models. Journal of Statistical Software, 46(2), 1–39.
41.
MulderJ.HoijtinkH.KlugkistI. (2010). Equality and inequality constrained multivariate linear models: Objective model selection using constrained posterior priors. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 140, 887–906. doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2009.09.022
42.
MulderJ.KlugkistI.MeeusW.Van de SchootA.SelfhoutM.HoijtinkH. (2009). Bayesian model selection of informative hypotheses for repeated measurements. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 530–546. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2009.09.003
43.
NaglieriJ. A. (2001). Do ability and reading achievement correlate?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 304–305. doi:10.1177/002221940103400403
44.
NationK.SnowlingM. J. (1998). Individual differences in the contextual facilitation: Evidence from dyslexia and poor reading comprehension. Child Development, 69, 996–1011. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06157.x
45.
NielsenM. E. (2002). Gifted students with learning disabilities: Recommendations for identification and programming. Exceptionality, 10, 93–111. doi:10.1207/S15327035EX1002_4
46.
PenningtonB. F. (2006). From single to multiple deficit models of developmental disorders. Cognition, 101, 385–413. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2006.04.008
47.
ReisS. M.GubbinsE. J.BriggsC. J.SchreiberF. J.RichardsS.JacobsJ. K. . . . RenzulliJ. S. (2004). Reading instruction for talented readers: Case studies documenting few opportunities for continuous progress. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 315–339. doi:10.1177/001698620404800406
SnowlingM. J. (1998). Dyslexia as a phonological deficit: Evidence and implications. Child Psychology & Psychiatry Review, 3, 4–11. doi:10.1111/1475-3588.00201
50.
SnowlingM. J. (2000). Dyslexia. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
51.
SnowlingM. J. (2008). Specific disorders and broader phenotypes: The case of dyslexia. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 142–156. doi:10.1080/17470210701508830
52.
SnowlingM. J.HulmeC. (2012). Annual research review: The nature and classification of reading disorders—A commentary on proposals for DSM-5. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53, 593–607. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02495.x
53.
VaessenA.GerretsenP.BlomertL. (2009). Naming problems do not reflect a second independent core deficit in dyslexia: Double deficits explored. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 103, 202–221. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2008.12.004
54.
ValdoisS.Lassus-SangosseD.LobierM. (2012). Impaired letter-string processing in developmental dyslexia: What visual-to-phonology code mapping disorder?Dyslexia, 18, 77–93. doi:10.1002/dys.1437
55.
Van den BoerM.De JongP. F.Haentjens-van MeeterenM. M. (2013). Modeling the length effect: Specifying the relation with visual and phonological correlates of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 243–256. doi:10.1080/10888438.2012.683222
56.
Van den BosK. P.Lutje SpelbergH. C. (2007). Continu Benoemen & Woorden Lezen (CB&WL) [Continuous naming & word reading]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Boom.
57.
Van den BosK. P.Lutje SpelbergH. C.De GrootB. J. A. (2011). Fonemische Analyse Test (FAT) [Phonemic analysis test]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pearson.
58.
Van den BosK. P.Lutje SpelbergH. C.ScheepstraA. J. M.De VriesJ. R. (1994). De Klepel. Vorm A en B [Nonword reading test]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pearson.
59.
Van den BosK. P.ScheepstraA. J. M. (1993). Het lezen van pseudowoorden en bestaande woorden. Deel II: Decodeerroutes en decoderproblemen [Reading of nonword and words. Part II: Decoding routes and decoding problems]. Tijdschrift voor Orthopedagogiek, 32, 225–237.
60.
Van de SchootR.HoijtingH.MulderJ.Van AkenM. A. G.OrobiodeCastroB.MeeusW.RomeijnJ. (2011). Evaluating expectations about negative emotional states of aggressive boys using Bayesian model selection. Developmental Psychology, 47, 203–212. doi:10.1037/a0020957
61.
VellutinoF. R.FletcherJ. M.SnowlingM. J.ScanlonD. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades?Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 2–40. doi:10.1046/j.0021-9630.2003.00305.x
62.
VellutinoF. R.ScanlonD. M.LyonG. R. (2000). Differentiation between difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ–achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 233–238. doi:10.1177/002221940003300302
63.
VisserJ.Van LaarhovenA.Ter BeekA. (1996). AVI-Toetspakket, 3e herziene versie [AVI test package, 3rd version revised]. ‘s Hertogenbosch, Netherlands: Katholiek Pedagogisch Centrum.
64.
WaldronK. A.SaphireD. G. (1990). An analysis of WISC-R factors for gifted students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 491–498. doi:10.1177/002221949002300807
65.
WaldronK. A.SaphireD. G. (1992). Perceptual and academic patterns of learning disabled/gifted students. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 74, 599–609. doi:10.2466/pms.1992.74.2.599
66.
WarmingtonM.HulmeC. (2012). Phoneme awareness, visual-verbal paired associate learning, and rapid automatized naming as predictors of individual differences in reading ability. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16, 45–62. doi:10.1080/10888438.2010.534832
67.
WinnerE. (1997). Exceptionally high intelligence and schooling. American Psychologist, 52, 1070–1081. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.10.1070
