Temporal resolution ability in students with dyslexia and reading and writing disorders.

Juliana Chaubet, Liliane Pereira, Ana Paula Perez
Author Information
  1. Juliana Chaubet: Specialist at the Program in Human Communication Disorders - Speech and Hearing Department - Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil.
  2. Liliane Pereira: Associate Professor - Program in Human Communication Disorders - Speech and Hearing Department - Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil.
  3. Ana Paula Perez: PhD at Program in Human Communication Disorders - Speech and Hearing Department - Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil. Assistant Professor of the Department of Speech Language Patology - Universidade Federal Fluminense, Brazil.

Abstract

Introduction The Gaps-in-Noise (GIN) test assesses the hearing ability of temporal resolution. The development of this ability can be considered essential for learning how to read. Objective Identify temporal resolution in individuals diagnosed with reading and writing disorders compared with subjects with dyslexia. Methods A sample of 26 subjects of both genders, age 10 to 15 years, included 11 diagnosed with dyslexia and 15 diagnosed with reading and writing disorders. Subjects did not display otologic, neurologic, and/or cognitive diseases. A control group of 30 normal-hearing subjects was formed to compare thresholds and percentages obtained from the GIN test. The responses were obtained considering two measures of analysis: the threshold gap and the percentage of correct gap. Results The threshold was lower in the GIN for the typical group than for the other groups. There was no difference between groups with dyslexia and with reading and writing disorders. The GIN results of the typical group revealed a higher percentage of correct answer than in the other groups. No difference was obtained between the groups with dyslexia and with reading and writing disorders. Conclusion The GIN test identified a difficulty in auditory ability of temporal resolution in individuals with reading and writing disorders and in individuals with dyslexia in a similar way.

Keywords

References

  1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Mar 14;97(6):2952-7 [PMID: 10688885]
  2. Int J Audiol. 2008 May;47(5):238-45 [PMID: 18465408]
  3. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2010 Nov-Dec;76(6):745-52 [PMID: 21180943]
  4. Percept Psychophys. 1993 Sep;54(3):395-405 [PMID: 8414898]
  5. J Neurophysiol. 2000 Sep;84(3):1453-63 [PMID: 10980018]
  6. Int J Audiol. 2013 Feb;52(2):113-23 [PMID: 23167240]
  7. Pro Fono. 2009 Jan-Mar;21(1):13-8 [PMID: 19360253]
  8. Ear Hear. 2006 Jun;27(3):286-98 [PMID: 16672797]
  9. Pro Fono. 2010 Jan-Mar;22(1):7-12 [PMID: 20339801]
  10. Pro Fono. 2010 Oct-Dec;22(4):537-42 [PMID: 21271113]
  11. J Speech Hear Disord. 1981 Feb;46(1):1-9 [PMID: 7206670]
  12. Pro Fono. 2008 Jan-Mar;20(1):19-24 [PMID: 18408859]
  13. Pro Fono. 2010 Oct-Dec;22(4):521-4 [PMID: 21271110]
  14. Neuroreport. 2001 Feb 12;12(2):299-307 [PMID: 11209939]
  15. J Speech Hear Res. 1996 Dec;39(6):1315-20 [PMID: 8959616]
  16. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005 Sep;16(8):554-63 [PMID: 16295242]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0dyslexiareadingwritingdisordersGINabilityresolutiongroupstesttemporalindividualsdiagnosedsubjectsgroupobtainedhearing15thresholdgappercentagecorrecttypicaldifferenceauditoryIntroduction TheGaps-in-NoiseassessesdevelopmentcanconsideredessentiallearningreadObjective IdentifycomparedMethods Asample26gendersage10yearsincluded11Subjectsdisplayotologicneurologicand/orcognitivediseasescontrol30normal-hearingformedcomparethresholdspercentagesresponsesconsideringtwomeasuresanalysis:Results ThelowerresultsrevealedhigheranswerConclusion TheidentifieddifficultysimilarwayTemporalstudentsperceptiontests

Similar Articles

Cited By