A target group of college students with learning/ reading disabilities was compared with reading-level (RA) and chronological-age (CA) contrast groups on several phonological and morphological computerized information-processing tasks. Results confirm the importance of accurate and rapid processing of simple lexical items to the automatic level. The target students were less accurate and took longer reaction time, as compared with their CA controls, though not with the RA contrast group, in deciding if pseudohomophonics sounded like real words and if pairs of words with different rime conditions rhymed. The target students showed both quantitative and qualitative differences in processing morphological words and morphographic letter strings, in contrast to some earlier findings. The integration of phonological and morphological knowledge is emphasized in working with adult college students with learning/ reading disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, M.J., & Huggins, A.W.F. (1985). The growth of children's sight vocabulary: A quick test with educational and theoretical implications . Reading Resarch Quarterly, 20, 262-281.
2.
Bamett. V., & Lewis, T. (1984). Outliers in statistical data (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
3.
Bell, L.C., & Perfetti, C.A. (1994). Reading skill: Some adult comparisons. Journal of EdumtioW Psychology, 86, 244-255.
4.
Ben-Dror, I., Pollatsek, A., & Scarpati, S. (1991). Word identification in isolation and in context by college dyslexia students. Brain andLanguage, 40, 471-490.
5.
Bruck, M. (1990). Word-recognition skills of adults with childhood diagnoses of dyslexia. Developmental Psychology, 26, 439-454.
6.
Bruck, M. (1992). Persistence of dyslexics' phonological awareness deficits. Developmental Psychology, 28, 874-886.
7.
Bruck, M. (1993). Component spelling skills of college students with childhood diagnosis of dyslexia. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16, 171-184.
8.
Carr, T. H., & Levy, B. A. (Eds.). (1990). Reading and its development: Component skills approaches. New York: Academic Press.
9.
Carroll, J.B., Davies, P., & Richman, B. (1971). The American heritage word frequency book. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
10.
Coltheart, M. (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of information processing (pp. 151-216). San Diego: Academic Press.
11.
Coltheart, M. (1985). Cognitive neuropsychology and the study of reading . In M. I. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp. 3-37). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12.
Fowler, A.E., & Scarborough, H.S. (1993). Should reading-disabled adults be distinguished from other adults seeking literacy instruction? A review of theory and research (Tech. Rep. No. TR93-7). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania National Center for Adult Literacy.
13.
Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (1989). The interpretation of studies using the reading level design. Journal of Reading Behavior, 21, 413-424.
14.
Hatano, G. (1986). How do Japanese children learn to read? Orthographic and eco-cultural variables. In B. R. Foorman & A. W. Siegel (Eds.), Acquisition of reading skills: Cultural constraints and cognitive universals (pp. 81-114). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15.
Henry, M.K. (1990). Words. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
16.
Henry, M.K. (1993). Morphological structure: Latin and Greek roots and affixes as upper grade code strategies. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5,227-241.
17.
Høien, T., Lundberg, I., Stanovich, K.E., & Bjaalid, I.-K. (1995). Components of phonological awareness. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal , 7, 171-188.
18.
Jackson, N.E., & Butterfield, E.C. (1989). Reading-level-match designs: Myths and realities. Journal of Reading Behavior, 21, 387-412.
19.
Jastak, S., & Wilkinson, G.S. (1984). The wide range achievement test-Revised: Administration manual. Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates.
20.
Leong, C.K. (1989). Productive knowledge of derivational rules in poor readers. Annals of Dyslexia, 39, 94-115.
21.
Leong, C.K. (1992). Cognitive componential modelling of reading in ten- to twelve-year-old readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 327-364.
22.
Leong, C.K., & Parkinson, M.E. (1992). Sensitivity to orthotactic rules in visual word recognition by below average readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 1-17.
23.
Leong, C.K., & Parkinson, M.E. (1995). Processing of English morphological structure by poor readers. In C. K. Leong & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Developmental and acquired dyslexia (pp. 237-261). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
24.
Leong, C.K., & Tamaoka, K. (1995). Use of phonological information in processing kanji and katakana by skilled and less skilled Japanese readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 7, 377-393.
25.
Lundberg, I., Frost, J., & Petersen, O.-P. (1988). Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in preschool children. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 263-284.
26.
Moats, L.C., & Lyon, G.R. (1993). Learning disabilities in the United States: Advocacy, science, and the future of the field. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 282-294.
27.
Morris, R., Lyon, G.R., Alexander, D., Gray, D.B., Kavanagh, J., Rourke, B.P., & Swanson, H.L. (1994). Editorial: Proposed guidelines and criteria for describing samples of persons with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 106-109.
28.
Olson, R., Kliegl, R., Davidson, B.J., & Foltz, G. (1985). Individual and developmental differences in reading disability. In G. E. Mackinnon & T. G. Waller (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vo. 4, pp. 1-64). New York: Academic Press.
29.
Olson, R., Wise, B., Conners, F., & Rack, J. (1990). Organization, heritability, and remediation of component word recognition and language skills in disabled readers. In T. H. Carr & B. A. Levy (Eds.), Reading and its development: Component skills approaches (pp. 261-322). New York: Academic Press.
30.
Perfetti, C.A. (1991). Representations and awareness in the acquisition of reading competence. In L. Rieben & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Learning to read: Basic research and its implications (pp. 33-44). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
31.
Raven, J.C. (1969). Guide to the Standard Progressive Matrices: Sets A, B, C, D and E. London: H. K. Lewis.
32.
Scott, S.S. (1990). Coming to terms with the "otherwise qualified" student with a learning disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 23, 398-405.
33.
Shankweiler, D., Crain, S., Brady, S., & Macaruso, P. (1992). Identifying the causes of reading disability. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 275-305). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34.
Shankweiler, D., Lundquist, E., Dreyer, L.G., & Dickinson, C.C. (1996). Reading and spelling difficulties in high school students: Causes and consequences. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8, 267-294.
35.
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407.
36.
Stanovich, K.E. (1993). The construct validity of discrepancy definitions of reading disability. In G. R. Lyon, D. B. Gray, J. F. Kavanagh , & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Better understanding learning disabilities: New views from research and their implications for education and public policies (pp. 273-307). Baltimore: Brookes.
37.
Statistics Canada. (1996). Reading the future: A portrait of literacy in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Author.
38.
Stemberger, J.P. (1985). The lexicon in a model of language producation . New York: Garland.
39.
Taft, M. (1987). A morphological-decomposition model of lexical representation. Linguistics, 26, 657-667.
40.
Taft, M. (1991). Reading and the mental lexicon. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
41.
Taft, M. (1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes , 9, 273-294.
42.
Taft, M., & Forster, K.I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 638-647.
43.
Vellutino, F.R., & Scanlon, D.M. (1989). Some prerequisites for interpreting results from reading level matched designs. Journal of Reading Behariar , 21, 361-385.
44.
Vogel, S.A. (1985). Learning disabled college students: Identification, assessment, and outcomes. In D. D. Duane & C. K Leong (Eds.), Undnstanding ktmring disabilities: Internatinnal and multidisciplinary views (pp. 179-203). New York: Plenum Press.
45.
Wechsler, D. (1981). Wechsler adult intelligence scale-Revised. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
46.
Williams, E. (1981). On the notion of "lexically related" and "head of word" Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 245-274.
