↓ Skip to main content

Visual processing in reading disorders and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and its contribution to basic reading ability

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Visual processing in reading disorders and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and its contribution to basic reading ability
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01635
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Y. Kibby, Sarah M. Dyer, Sarah A. Vadnais, Audreyana C. Jagger, Gabriel A. Casher, Maria Stacy

Abstract

Whether visual processing deficits are common in reading disorders (RD), and related to reading ability in general, has been debated for decades. The type of visual processing affected also is debated, although visual discrimination and short-term memory (STM) may be more commonly related to reading ability. Reading disorders are frequently comorbid with ADHD, and children with ADHD often have subclinical reading problems. Hence, children with ADHD were used as a comparison group in this study. ADHD and RD may be dissociated in terms of visual processing. Whereas RD may be associated with deficits in visual discrimination and STM for order, ADHD is associated with deficits in visual-spatial processing. Thus, we hypothesized that children with RD would perform worse than controls and children with ADHD only on a measure of visual discrimination and a measure of visual STM that requires memory for order. We expected all groups would perform comparably on the measure of visual STM that does not require sequential processing. We found children with RD or ADHD were commensurate to controls on measures of visual discrimination and visual STM that do not require sequential processing. In contrast, both RD groups (RD, RD/ADHD) performed worse than controls on the measure of visual STM that requires memory for order, and children with comorbid RD/ADHD performed worse than those with ADHD. In addition, of the three visual measures, only sequential visual STM predicted reading ability. Hence, our findings suggest there is a deficit in visual sequential STM that is specific to RD and is related to basic reading ability. The source of this deficit is worthy of further research, but it may include both reduced memory for order and poorer verbal mediation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 102 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 8%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 21 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 16%
Social Sciences 10 9%
Neuroscience 9 8%
Linguistics 4 4%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 20 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,776,263
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,471
of 29,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,793
of 284,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#367
of 488 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,820 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,522 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 488 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.