The influence of orthographic transparency on the prevalence of dyslexia subtypes was examined in a review of multiple-case studies conducted in languages differing in orthographic depth (English, French, and Spanish). Cross-language differences are found in the proportion of dissociated profiles as a function of the dependent variables (speed or accuracy), the classification method (classical vs. regressionbased methods), and the control sample (chronological age vs. reading level controls). The classical method results in a majority of mixed profiles, whereas the regression-based method results in a majority of dissociated profiles. However, the regression-based method appears to result in less reliable subtypes within and between languages. Finally, reading-level comparisons revealed that the phonological subtype reflects a deviant developmental trajectory across all languages, whereas the surface subtype corresponds to a delayed developmental trajectory. The results also indicate that reading speed should be considered to correctly classify dyslexics into subtypes, at least in transparent orthographies. © 2011 Society for the Scientific Study of Reading.
CITATION STYLE
Sprenger-Charolles, L., Siegel, L. S., Jiménez, J. E., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). Prevalence and reliability of phonological, surface, and mixed profiles in dyslexia: A review of studies conducted in languages varying in orthographic depth. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(6), 498–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2010.524463
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.