Sensory Dominance in Normal and Backward Readers

Abstract

32 children (10 normal readers, 10 non-resistant backward readers, and 12 resistant backward readers) were examined for visual and kinaesthetic sensitivity, as measured by a difference-threshold procedure. Birch's hypothesis that the failure of the visual system to be dominant in sensory systems may lead to reading difficulties was tested. To verify this hypothesis the rank-differences, S's visual minus his kinaesthetic threshold rank, should be larger in backward than in normal readers. Results support the hypothesis In addition, it appeared that the dyslectics differ from normal readers not so much by greater kinaesthetic as by lower visual sensitivity. The existence of a smaller visual dominance in dyslectics may be responsible for kinaesthetic interference in the visual information process in reading.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Birch

H. G.

Dyslexia and the maturation of visual function. In Money

(Ed.), Reading disability. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1962. Pp. 161–169.

Fleishman

E. A.

An analysis of positioning movements and static reactions. J. exp. Psychol., 1958, 55, 13–24.

Peiper

Cerebral function in infancy and childhood. New York: Consultants Bureau, 1963.

Renshaw

The errors of cutaneous localization and the effect of practice on the localizing movement in children and adults. J. genet. Psychol., 1930, 38, 223–237.

Renshaw

Wherry

R. J.

Studies on cutaneous localization: III. the age of onset of ocular dominance. J. genet. Psychol., 1931, 31, 493–496.

Renshaw

Wherry

R. J.

Newlin

J. C.

Cutaneous localization in congenitally blind versus seeing children and adults. J. genet. Psychol., 1930, 38, 239–248.