This study examined children's presentations of the “LD experience” as expressed in online messages on a public website designed for children with learning and attention problems. Earlier research has demonstrated that children view the Internet as a social medium that enables communication and promotes personal relationships. In the current study, we assumed that students with LD would treat this specially designed website as a “safe environment,” enabling them to present their self-identities as children with LD and to share the personal meaning of their challenges. By studying their online messages, we sought to develop a deeper understanding of the children's thoughts, feelings and attitudes, as well as the ways they present themselves online. Theme analysis was performed on 4,903 e-mails sent from 164 self-identified LD participants ages 9–18. Six major themes emerged: (a) LD identity presentation; (b) disclosure of academic difficulties; (c-d) disclosure of emotional problems and social distress; (e) requests for help; and (f) description of positive aspects of LD. Results demonstrated the potential the study of online messaging has for understanding the LD experience. Implications for practice, considerations regarding future studies, and study limitations are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbramsD.HoggM.A. (1990). Social identity theory. New York: Harvester.
2.
AlbingerP. (1995). Stories from the resource room: Piano lessons, imaginary illness and broken-down cars. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28 (10), 615–621.
3.
AlvermannD.E. (2004). Media, information communication technologies, and youth literacies: A cultural studies perspective. The American Behavioral Scientist, 48 (1), 78–84.
4.
Al-YagonM.MikulincerM. (2004). Socioemotional and academic adjustment among children with learning disorders: The mediational role of attachment-based factors. Journal of Special Education, 38, 111–124.
5.
ArcherJ.L. (1980). Self-disclosure. In WegnerT.V.D. (Eds.), The self in social psychology (pp. 183–204). London: Oxford University Press.)
6.
AxelrodL. (1982). Social perception in learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15 (10), 610–613.
7.
BarghJ.A. (2002). Beyond simple truths: The human-Internet interaction. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 1–8.
8.
BarghJ.A.McKennaK.Y.A. (2004). The Internet and social life. Annual Review in Psychology, 55, 573–590.
9.
BaumingerN.EdelszteinH.S.MorashJ. (2005). Social information processing and emotional understanding in children with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38 (1), 45–61.
10.
BowlbyJ. (1988). A secure base. New York: Basic Books.
11.
BryanT. (1998). Social competence of students with learning disabilities. In WongB.Y.L. (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities(pp. 237–275). San Diego, CA: Academic Press)
12.
BryanT. (1999). Reflections on a research career: It ain't over till it's over. Exceptional Children, 65 (4), 438–448.
13.
BryanT.BursteinK.S.ErgulC. (2004). The social-emotional side of learning disabilities: A science-based presentation of the state of the art. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27 (1) 45-
14.
BucholtzM. (2002). Youth and cultural practice. Annual Review of Anthropology, 31, 525–553.
15.
CalvertS.L. (2002). Identity construction on the Internet. In CalvertS.L.JordanA.B.CockingR.R. (Eds.), Children in the digital age: Influences of electronic media on development (pp. 57–70). Westport, CT: Praeger.)
16.
CalvertS.L.MahlerB.A.ZehnderS.M.JenkinsA.LeeM.S. (2003). Gender differences in preadolescent children's online interactions: Symbolic modes of self-presentation and self-expression. Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 627–644.
Children's Online Privacy and Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA), 15 USC 6501 et seq.
19.
DimitrovskyL.SpectorH.Levy-SchiffR.VakilE. (1998). Interpretation of facial expressions of affect in children with learning disabilities with verbal or nonverbal deficits. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31 (3), 286–293, 312.
20.
DringusL.P.EllisT. (2005). Using data mining as a strategy for assessing asynchronous discussion forums. Computers & Education, 45, 141–160.
21.
Dudley-MarlingC. (2004). The social construction of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37 (6), 482–490.
22.
ElbaumB.VaughnS. (2003). Self-concept and students with learning disabilities. In SwansonH.L.HarrisK.R.GrahamS. (Eds.), The handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 229–241). New York: Guilford Press.)
23.
FerriB.A. (2000). The hidden cost of difference: Women with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10 (3), 129–138.
24.
FleischmannA. (2004). Narratives published on the Internet by parents of children with autism: What do they reveal and why is it important?Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19 (1), 35–43.
25.
GoldbergR.J.HigginsE.L.RaskindM.H.HermanK.L. (2003). Predictors of success in individuals with learning disabilities: A qualitative analysis of a 20-year longitudinal study. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18 (4), 222–236.
26.
GutermanB.R. (1995). The validity of learning disabilities categorical services: The consumer's view. Exceptional Children, 62, 111–124.
27.
HarterS. (1998). The development of self-representations. In DamonW.EisenbergN. (Eds.), Social, emotional and personality development (5th ed.). Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 533–617). New York: Wiley.)
28.
HigginsE.L.RaskindM.H.GoldbergR.J.HermanK.L. (2002). Stages of acceptance of a learning disability: The impact of labeling. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 3–18.
29.
HuntingtonD.D.BenderW.N. (1993). Adolescence with learning disabilities at risk? Emotional well-being, depression, suicide. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 159–166.
30.
JoinsonA.N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 177–192.
31.
KavaleK.A.FornessS.R. (1995). Social skill deficits and training: A meta-analysis of the research in learning disabilities. Advances in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities, 119–160.
32.
KavaleK.A.MostertM.P. (2004). Social skills interventions for individuals with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27 (1), 31–44.
33.
KimS.T.WeaverD. (2002). Communication research about the Internet: A thematic meta-analysis. New Media & Society, 4 (4), 518–538.
34.
KrautR.E.KieslerS.BonevaB.CummingsJ.HelgesonV.CrawfordA. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58 (1), 49–74.
35.
KrautR.E.PattersonM.LundmarkV.KieslerS.MukhopadhyayT.ScherlisW. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being. American Psychologist, 53, 1017–1032.
36.
KrippendorffK. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37.
KupferbergI.Ben-PeretzM. (2004). Emerging and experienced professional selves in cyber discourse. In VrasidasC.GlassG.V. (Eds.), Online professional development for teachers. Current perspectives on applied information technologies: Online professional development (Vol. 2, pp. 105–121). Greenwich, CT: IAP.)
38.
La GrecaA.M.StoneW.L. (1990). LD status and achievement: Confounding variables in the study of children's social status, self-esteem and behavioral functioning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23 (8) 483–490.
39.
LivingstoneS. (2003). Children's use of the Internet: Reflections on the emerging research agenda. New Media & Society, 5 (2), 147–166.
40.
MacArthurC. (2003). What have we learned about learning disabilities from qualitative research: A review of studies. In SwansonH.L.HarrisK.R.GrahamS. (Eds.), The handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 532–549). New York: Guilford Press.)
41.
MaczewskiM. (2002). Exploring identities through the Internet: Youth experiences online. Child and Youth Care Forum, 31 (2), 111–129.
42.
MargalitM. (1994). Loneliness among children with special needs: Theory, research, coping and intervention. New York: SpringerVerlag.
43.
MargalitM. (1998). Loneliness and coherence among preschool children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31 (2) 173–180.
44.
MargalitM. (2003). Resilience model among individuals with learning disabilities: Proximal and distal influences. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18 (2), 82–86.
45.
MargalitM.Al-YagonM. (2002). The loneliness experience of children with learning disabilities. In WongB.Y.L.DonahueM. (Eds., The social dimensions of learning disabilities (pp. 53–75). Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.)
46.
MargalitM.ZakI. (1984). Anxiety and self-concept of learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 537–539.
47.
MargalitM.ZimanT. (2004). Virtual friendship comparisons of e-messages between students with and without LD. Unpublished research report, School of Education, Tel-Aviv University.
48.
MayringPh. (2000). Qualitative inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und techniken (7th ed.). Weinheim, Germany: Deutscher Studien Verlag.
49.
McKennaK.Y.A.GreenA.S.GleasonM.E.J. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What's the big attraction?Journal of Social Issues, 58, 19–31.
50.
McNultyM.A. (2003). Dyslexia and the life course. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36 (4), 363–381.
51.
MichinovN.MichinovE.Toczek-CapelleM.C. (2004). Social identity, group processes, and performance in synchronous computer-mediated communication. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 8 (1), 27–39.
52.
NabuzokaD.SmithP.K. (1995). Identification of expressions of emotions by children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 10 (2), 91–101.
53.
PoplinM. (1995). The dialectic nature of technology and holism: Use of technology to liberate individuals with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 131–140.
54.
RaskindM.H.GoldbergR.J.HigginsE.L.HermanK.L. (1999). Patterns of change and predictors of success in individuals with learning disabilities: Results from a twenty-year longitudinal study. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14 (1), 35–49.
55.
ReidD.K.ButtonL.J. (1995). Anna's story: Narratives of personal experience about being labeled learning disabled. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28 (10), 602–614.
56.
ReidD.K.ValleJ.W. (2004). The discursive practice of learning disability: Implications for instruction and parent-school relations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37 (6), 466–482.
RodisP.GarrodA.BoscardinM.L. (2001). Learning disabilities and life stories. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
59.
RosenbergM.S.BottD.MajsterekD.ChiangB.GartlandD.WessonC. (1992). Minimum standards for the description of participants in learning disabilities research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, 114–121.
60.
RubinZ. (1975). Disclosing oneself to a stranger: reciprocity and its limits. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 233–260.
61.
MiguelS.K. SanFornessS.R.KavaleK.A. (1996). Social skills deficits in learning disabilities: The psychiatric comorbidity hypothesis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19, 252–261.
62.
SassenbergK.PostmesT. (2002). Cognitive and strategic processes in small groups: Effects of anonymity of the self and anonymity of the group on social influence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 463–480.
63.
SisterhenD.H.GerberP.J. (1989). Auditory, visual and multisensory nonverbal social perception in adolescents with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22 (4), 245–249, 257.
64.
SpradleyJ.P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
65.
SpradleyJ.P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
66.
StoneC.A. (2004). The role of social support and congruency of perspectives in moderating threats to self-concept in high-functioning adolescents with learning disabilities: A preliminary report. Thalamus, 22 (1), 40–49.
67.
StoneC.A.MayA.L. (2002). The accuracy of academic self-evaluations in adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35 (4), 370–383.
68.
SwansonH.L.HarrisK.R.GrahamS. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of learning disabilities. New York: Guilford Press)
69.
SwansonH.L.HoskynM.LeeC. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: Guilford Press.
70.
SwansonH.L.KeoghB. (1990). Learning disabilities: Theoretical and research issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
TurkleS. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster.
73.
TurkleS. (1996). Virtuality and its discontents: Searching for community in cyberspace. The American Prospect, 24, 50–57.
74.
TurnerJ.C.HoggM.A.OakesP.ReicherS.D.WetherellM.S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
75.
VanLearC.A.SheehanM.WithersL.A.WalkerR.A. (2005). AA Online: The enactment of supportive computer mediated communication. Western Journal of Communication, 69 (1), 5–27.
76.
VaughnS.ElbaumB.SchummJ.S.HughesM.T. (1998). Social outcomes for students with and without learning disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31 (5), 428–436.
77.
WambsganD.T. (1990). Being successful with dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23 (1), 9–10.
78.
WernerE.E. (1993). Risk and resilience in individuals with learning disabilities: Lessons learned from the Kauai longitudinal study. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 8, 28–35.
79.
WestT.C. (1991). In the mind's eye. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
80.
WienerJ. (2002). Friendship and social adjustment of children with learning disabilities. In WongB.DonahueM. (Eds.), The social dimensions of learning disabilities (pp. 93–114). Chicago: Erlbaum.)
81.
WienerJ. (2004). Do peer relationships foster behavioral adjustment in children with learning disabilities?Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 21–30.
82.
WienerJ.SchneiderB.H. (2002). A multisource exploration of the friendship patterns of children with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 30, 127–141.
83.
WrightK.B. (2004). Online relational maintenance strategies and perceptions of partners within exclusively Internet-based and primary Internet-based relations. Communication Studies, 55 (2), 239–254.
