Studies of dyslexia often produce contradictory results. Studies of eye movement are not an exception to this rule. The differences between Black, et al.'s 1984 and Pavlidis's 1981 eye-movement results are mainly due to differences in: (a) unquantifiable and variable criteria for selection of subjects, (b) incompatible experimental designs and procedures, (c) varying stimulus characteristics, and (d) major differences in the methods of data acquisition and analysis. The solution of these problems requires the establishment of quantifiable Research Diagnostic Criteria for Dyslexia and the use of compatible methods of data acquisition and analysis. The adoption of these standards would lead to a better understanding of dyslexia and would also make possible meaningful replications of major studies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlackJ. L.CollinsD. W. K.De RoachJ. N., & ZubrickS.A detailed study of sequential saccadic eye movements for normal and poor reading children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1984, 51, 423–434.
2.
BrownB.Haegerstrom-PortnoyG.AdamsA. J.YinglingC. D.GalinD.HerronJ., & MarcusM.Predictive eye movements do not discriminate between dyslexic and control children. Neuropsychologia, 1983, 21, 121–128.
3.
BuzzeliA. R., & PavlidisG.Th. Visual acuity, stereopsis, accommodative and vergence facility: Do they relate to dyslexia?Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics, 1983, 60, 7–12.
4.
DobbinsD. A.The prevalence and characteristics of children with specific learning disabilities. Final report, Department of Education and Science, London, England, 1984.
5.
EltermanR. D.AbelL.A.DaroffR. B.Dell'OssoL. F., & BornsteinJ. L.Eye movement patterns in dyslexic children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1980, 13, 16–21.
6.
GilbertL. C.Functional motor efficiency of the eyes and its relation to reading. University of California Publication in Education, 1953, 11, 159–231.
7.
GriffinD. C.WaltonH. N., & IvesV.Saccades as related to reading disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1974, 7, 310–316.
8.
GoldrichS. G., & SedgwickH.An objective comparison of oculomotor functioning in reading disabled and normal children. American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics, 1982, 59, 82.
9.
LesevreN.L'organisation du regard chez des enfants d'age scolaire, lecteurs normaux et dyslexiques. Revue de Neuropsychiatrie des Infant, 1968, 16, 323–349.
10.
OlsonR. K.KlieglR., & DavidsonB. J.Dyslexic and normal readers' eye movements. Journal of 'Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1983, 9, 816–825.
11.
PavlidisG. Th.Do eye movements hold the key to dyslexia?Neuropsychologia, 1981, 19, 57–64. (a)
12.
PavlidisG. Th.Sequencing, eye movements and the early objective diagnosis of dyslexia. In PavlidisG. Th. & MilesT. R. (Eds.), Dyslexia research and its applications to education. London: Wiley, 1981. Pp. 99–163. (b)
13.
PavlidisG. Th.Can dyslexia be differentially diagnosed from other types of reading retardation by eye movements?Paper presented at the 2nd World Congress on Dyslexia, Halkidiki, Greece, June 27–30, 1983. (a)
14.
PavlidisG. Th.Erratic sequential eye movements in dyslexics: Comments and reply to Stanley, et al. British Journal of Psychology, 1983, 74, 189–193. (b)
15.
PavlidisG. Th.Research diagnostic criteria for dyslexia: Their rationale. Paper presented at the 2nd World Congress on Dyslexia, Halkidiki, Greece, June 27–30, 1983. (c)
16.
PavlidisG. Th.Eye movement differences between dyslexics, normal and retarded readers while sequentially fixating digits. American Journal of Optometry and and Physiological Optics, in press, (a)
17.
PavlidisG. Th.The role of erratic eye movements in the early diagnosis of dyslexia. In PavlidisG. Th. & FisherD. F. (Eds.), Dyslexia: Neuropsychology and, treatment. London: Wiley, in press, (b)
18.
PavlidisG. Th.Eye movements in dyslexia: Their diagnostic significance. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1985, 18, 42–50. (c)
19.
StanleyG.SmithG. A., & HowellE. A.Eye movements and sequential tracking in dyslexic and control children. British Journal of Psychology, 1983, 74, 181–187.
