ORCID Profile
0000-0002-7285-8845
Current Organisation
University of Oslo
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2010
DOI: 10.1016/J.CORTEX.2010.06.006
Abstract: We examined two hypotheses relating auditory processing to dyslexia in Greek, an orthographically consistent language. Study I examined the "P-center" or "beat detection" hypothesis (Goswami et al., 2002) in a s le of Grade 6 dyslexics, Grade 6 chronological age (CA) controls, and Grade 4 reading age (RA) controls. Study II examined the "temporal processing," or "rapid auditory processing" hypothesis (Tallal, 1980) in a s le of Grade 7 dyslexics, CA controls, and in two groups of CA matched children with low frequency discrimination or low tone sequencing performance. Both studies indicate that (a) as a group, dyslexic children did not perform significantly worse on auditory processing measures than the control groups (b) measures of auditory processing mostly did not account for unique amount of variance in phonological processing, reading, or spelling and (c) at an in idual level of analysis, some of the dyslexic children experienced auditory temporal processing deficits. Implications on the importance of auditory processing in reading in orthographically consistent languages are discussed.
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 05-04-2018
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 10-01-2019
Abstract: We recently pointed out that there is no evidence to support the commonly held view that there is something wrong with the brains of children who have great difficulty learning to read. In response, it was argued that dyslexia should be considered to be a neurodevelopmental disorder because of its potential to adversely affect quality of life, and because there are differences between the brains of people with different levels of reading skill. We agree with these two points, but they are irrelevant to the issue in question, because neither establishes the critical notion of disrupted neurodevelopment that is, a brain fault. Differences between groups do not imply that any in iduals are abnormal, and calling a brain improperly developed on the basis of cultural issues has absurd implications. Even calling brains atypical is unfounded because reference to typicality hinges on knowledge of the relevant distributions, which is currently lacking. Moreover, there is at present no obvious role for neurology- or neuroscience-based input for the critical issue of the assessment and remediation of the reading difficulties themselves. We reiterate our conclusion that there is, at the moment, no credible foundation to support the claim that dyslexia is a neurodevelopmental disorder.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 27-07-2017
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 03-08-2016
Abstract: The concept of Matthew effects in reading development refers to a longitudinally widening gap between high achievers and low achievers. Various statistical approaches have been proposed to examine this idea. However, little attention has been paid to psychometric issues of scaling. Specifically, interval-level data are required to compare performance differences across performance ranges, but only ordinal-level data are available with current literacy measures. To demonstrate the interpretability problems of contrasting growth slopes, we use data from a longitudinal study of literacy development. We explore the possibility of comparing across ages, matched for performance, and we examine the consequences of nonlinear growth, temporal lag estimates, and in idual differences in developmental progression. We conclude that, although conceptually appealing, the widening gap prediction is not empirically testable.
No related grants have been discovered for Athanassios Protopapas.