Skip to main content
Log in

The influence of different diagnostic approaches on familial aggregation of spelling disability

  • Published:
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The influence of different diagnostic approaches on familial aggregation of spelling disability was investigated in three studies. In the first study, in a sample of 32 dyslexic children and their families, we found significantly incraeased rates of spelling-disabled sibs and parents by applying the IQ-discrepancy criterion. There was no evidence for the assumption that IQ-discrepancy and low achievement criteria define different subgroups of spelling disorder regarding familial aggregation. In the second study, in a sample of 79 adults, it could be demonstrated that questionnaire data can be used as an appropriate method to classify adult probands as spelling disabled with a correct classification rate above 87%. In the third study, a subgroup of dyslexic boys could be characterized by a lack of the N1-component in visual evoked potentials which was most prominent in those boys whose spelling scores were more than 1.5 standard deviations below their intelligence level. This subgroup could be interesting also for genetic research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olschen RA, Stone CJ (1984) Classification and regression trees (CART). Belmont: Wadsworth International Group

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brickenkamp R (1975) Handbuch psychologischer und pädagogischer Tests. Göttingen: Hogrefe

    Google Scholar 

  3. Finucci JM, Whitehouse CC, Issacs CC, Childs B (1984) Derivation and validation of a quantitative definition of specific reading disability for adults. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 26:143–153

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fletcher JM, Shaywitz SE, Shankweiler DP, Katz L, Liberman JY, Stuebing KK, Francis DJ, Fowler AE, Shaywitz BA (1994) Cognitive profiles of reading disability: Comparison of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Journal of Educational Psychology 86:6–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Glogauer W (1977) Rechtschreibleistung und Intelligenz: Eine empirische Untersuchung. Psychologie in Schule und Erziehung 24:287–292

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hennighausen K, Remschmidt H, Warnke A (1994) Visual evoked potentials in boys with developmental dyslexia. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 3:72–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jäger R, Jundt E (1973) Mannheimer Rechtschreib-Test (MRT) Göttingen: Hogrefe

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pennington BF, Gilger JW, Pauls D, Smith SSA, Smith SD, DeFries JC (1991) Evi-dence for a major gene transmission of developmental dyslexia. Journal of the American Medical Association 18:527–534

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pennington BF, Gilger JW, Olson RK, DeFries JC (1992) The external validity of age versus IQ-discrepancy of reading disability. Lessons from a twin study. Journal of Learning Disability 25:562–573

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Rutter M, Yule W (1975) The concept of specific reading retardation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 16:181–197

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schulte-Körne G, Deimel W, Müller K, Gutenbrunner C, Remschmidt H (1996) Familial aggregation of spelling disability. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 37: 817–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schulte-Körne G, Deimel W, Remschmidt H (1997) Can self-report data on deficits on reading and spelling predict spelling disability as defined by psychometric tests? Reading and Writing: An interdisciplinary journal 9:55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Smith SD, Kimberling WJ, Pennington BF, Lubs HA (1993) Specific reading disability: Identification of an inherited form through linkage analysis. Science 219:1345–1347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Stanovich KE, Siegel LS (1998) The role of JQ in the diagnosis of reading disorders: The quest for a subtype based on optitude achievement discrepancy. In: Rispens J, van Yperen TA, Yule W (Eds.) (1998) Perspectives on classification of specific developmental disorders. Dordrecht: Boston Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp: 105–153

    Google Scholar 

  15. Symann-Louett N, Gascon GG, Matsumiya Y, Lombroso CT (1977) Wave form diffe-rence in visual evoked responses between normal and reading disabled children. Neurology 27:156–159

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Weiss RH (1987) Grundintelligenztest. Skala II, CFT-20. Göttingen: Hogrefe

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wolff PH, Melengailis L (1994) Family patterns of developmental dyslexia: Clinical findings. American Journal of Medical Genetics (Neuropsychiatry Genetics) 54:122–131

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Remschmidt, H., Hennighausen, K., Schulte-Körne, G. et al. The influence of different diagnostic approaches on familial aggregation of spelling disability. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 8 (Suppl 3), S13–S20 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s007870050122

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s007870050122

Key words

Navigation