Limits...
Spelling Impairments in Italian Dyslexic Children with and without a History of Early Language Delay. Are There Any Differences?

Angelelli P, Marinelli CV, Iaia M, Putzolu A, Gasperini F, Brizzolara D, Chilosi AM - Front Psychol (2016)

Bottom Line: Moreover, spelling impairment assumed different characteristics in LD and NoLD children.LD children were more sensitive to acoustic-to-phonological variables, showing relevant failure especially on stimuli containing geminate consonants but also on polysyllabic stimuli and those containing non-continuant consonants.Error analysis confirmed these results, with LD children producing a higher rate of phonological errors respect to NoLD children and controls.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of History Society and Human Studies - Lab of Applied Psychology and Intervention, University of Salento Lecce, Italy.

ABSTRACT
Language delay is considered a frequent antecedent of literacy problems and both may be linked to phonological impairment. However, while several studies have examined the relationship between language delay and reading impairment, relatively few have focused on spelling. In this study, spelling performance of 28 children with developmental dyslexia (DD), 14 children with a history of language delay (LD), and 14 children without (NoLD) and 28 control participants were examined. Spelling was investigated by a writing to dictation task that included orthographically regular stimuli (word and non-words), as well as words with unpredictable transcription. Results indicated that all dyslexic participants underperformed compared to controls on both regular and unpredictable transcription stimuli, but LD performance was generally the worst. Moreover, spelling impairment assumed different characteristics in LD and NoLD children. LD children were more sensitive to acoustic-to-phonological variables, showing relevant failure especially on stimuli containing geminate consonants but also on polysyllabic stimuli and those containing non-continuant consonants. Error analysis confirmed these results, with LD children producing a higher rate of phonological errors respect to NoLD children and controls. Results were coherent with the hypothesis that among dyslexic children, those with previous language delay have more severe spelling deficit, suffering from defective orthographic lexical acquisition together with long-lasting phonological difficulties.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Left side of figures reports the percentage of lexical and non-lexical errors, respectively, in LD, NoLD dyslexic children, and control participants. Right side of figures represents the proportion of minimal distance, other and context sensitive errors among non-lexical errors in the three groups of participants.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4835762&req=5

Figure 2: Left side of figures reports the percentage of lexical and non-lexical errors, respectively, in LD, NoLD dyslexic children, and control participants. Right side of figures represents the proportion of minimal distance, other and context sensitive errors among non-lexical errors in the three groups of participants.

Mentions: Figure 2 (left side) reports percentage of errors reduced into two main categories (coherent with Notarnicola et al., 2012): lexical errors (phonologically plausible errors) vs. all non-lexical ones (context-sensitive, minimal distance and other errors), whose relative percentages are indicated on the right side of figure.


Spelling Impairments in Italian Dyslexic Children with and without a History of Early Language Delay. Are There Any Differences?

Angelelli P, Marinelli CV, Iaia M, Putzolu A, Gasperini F, Brizzolara D, Chilosi AM - Front Psychol (2016)

Left side of figures reports the percentage of lexical and non-lexical errors, respectively, in LD, NoLD dyslexic children, and control participants. Right side of figures represents the proportion of minimal distance, other and context sensitive errors among non-lexical errors in the three groups of participants.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4835762&req=5

Figure 2: Left side of figures reports the percentage of lexical and non-lexical errors, respectively, in LD, NoLD dyslexic children, and control participants. Right side of figures represents the proportion of minimal distance, other and context sensitive errors among non-lexical errors in the three groups of participants.
Mentions: Figure 2 (left side) reports percentage of errors reduced into two main categories (coherent with Notarnicola et al., 2012): lexical errors (phonologically plausible errors) vs. all non-lexical ones (context-sensitive, minimal distance and other errors), whose relative percentages are indicated on the right side of figure.

Bottom Line: Moreover, spelling impairment assumed different characteristics in LD and NoLD children.LD children were more sensitive to acoustic-to-phonological variables, showing relevant failure especially on stimuli containing geminate consonants but also on polysyllabic stimuli and those containing non-continuant consonants.Error analysis confirmed these results, with LD children producing a higher rate of phonological errors respect to NoLD children and controls.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of History Society and Human Studies - Lab of Applied Psychology and Intervention, University of Salento Lecce, Italy.

ABSTRACT
Language delay is considered a frequent antecedent of literacy problems and both may be linked to phonological impairment. However, while several studies have examined the relationship between language delay and reading impairment, relatively few have focused on spelling. In this study, spelling performance of 28 children with developmental dyslexia (DD), 14 children with a history of language delay (LD), and 14 children without (NoLD) and 28 control participants were examined. Spelling was investigated by a writing to dictation task that included orthographically regular stimuli (word and non-words), as well as words with unpredictable transcription. Results indicated that all dyslexic participants underperformed compared to controls on both regular and unpredictable transcription stimuli, but LD performance was generally the worst. Moreover, spelling impairment assumed different characteristics in LD and NoLD children. LD children were more sensitive to acoustic-to-phonological variables, showing relevant failure especially on stimuli containing geminate consonants but also on polysyllabic stimuli and those containing non-continuant consonants. Error analysis confirmed these results, with LD children producing a higher rate of phonological errors respect to NoLD children and controls. Results were coherent with the hypothesis that among dyslexic children, those with previous language delay have more severe spelling deficit, suffering from defective orthographic lexical acquisition together with long-lasting phonological difficulties.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus