Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 31, Issue 5, pp 1039–1061 | Cite as

Differential identification of females and males with reading difficulties: A meta-analysis

  • Jamie M. Quinn
Article

Abstract

Males are more likely than females to be identified as having reading difficulties, but it is unclear if this is a result of sample ascertainment or identification bias. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine the magnitude of gender differences in reading difficulties using available studies in which researchers investigated this difference and an additional dataset with a representative U.S. sample. After conducting a literature search, sixteen studies and a restricted use dataset were included in the present analysis (N = 552,729). A random-effects odds ratio model indicated that males are 1.83 times more likely than females to have reading difficulties. Moderator analyses revealed that the gender ratio is greater when the identified reading difficulties were more severe. Further, this difference in identification rates across males and females was found without evidence of publication bias. Implications for the identification of students with reading difficulties are discussed.

Keywords

Gender differences Reading Meta-analysis Identification 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by grant P50 HD052117-07 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development or the National Institutes of Health. I would like to express my immense gratitude to Dr. Greg Roberts, Dr. Sharon Vaughn, and Dr. Richard Wagner for their incredible mentorship.

Supplementary material

11145_2018_9827_MOESM1_ESM.docx (25 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 25 kb)
11145_2018_9827_MOESM2_ESM.docx (73 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 72 kb)
11145_2018_9827_MOESM3_ESM.docx (24 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 23 kb)

References

  1. *Denotes that a reference was used in the meta-analyses.Google Scholar
  2. Arnett, A. B., Pennington, B. F., Peterson, R. L., Willcutt, E. G., DeFries, J. C., & Olson, R. K. (2017). Explaining the sex difference in dyslexia. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58, 719–727.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Badian, N. A. (1999). Reading disability defined as a discrepancy between listening and reading comprehension: A longitudinal study of stability, gender differences, and prevalence. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 138–148.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949903200204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beech, J., & Beauvois, M. (2005). Early experience of sex hormones as a predictor of reading, phonology, and auditory perception. Brain and Language, 96, 49–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.08.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. *Berger, M., Yule, W., & Rutter, M. (1975). Attainment and adjustment in two geographical areas: II. The prevalence of specific reading disability. British Journal of Psychiatry, 126, 510–519.  https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.126.6.510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berninger, V. W., Nielsen, K. H., Abbott, R. D., Wijsman, E., & Raskind, W. (2008). Gender differences in severity of writing and reading disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 151–172.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2007.02.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carrion-Castillo, A., Maassen, B., Franke, B., Heister, A., Naber, M., Van Der Leij, A., et al. (2017). Association analysis of dyslexia candidate genes in a Dutch longitudinal sample. European Journal of Human Genetics, 25, 452–460.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2016.194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Caruso, J. C., & Witkiewitz, K. (2002). Increasing the reliability of ability-achievement difference scores: An example using the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. Journal of Educational Measurement, 39, 39–58.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2002.tb01134.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cattell, R. B. (1982). The clinical use of difference scores: Some psychometric problems. Multivariate Experimental Clinical Research, 6, 87–98. http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1983-31658-001.
  10. *Chan, D. W., Ho, C. S., Tsang, S., Lee, S., & Chung, K. K. H. (2007). Prevalence, gender ratio and gender differences in reading-related cognitive abilities among Chinese children with dyslexia in Hong Kong. Educational Studies, 33, 249–265.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690601068535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chan, D. W., Ho, C. S., Tsang, S., Lee, S., & Chung, K. K. H. (2008). Estimating incidence of developmental dyslexia in Hong Kong: What differences do different criteria make? Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 13, 1–16.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19404150802093695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cotton, S. M., Crewther, D. P., & Crewther, S. G. (2005). Measurement error: implications for diagnosis and discrepancy models of developmental dyslexia. Dyslexia, 11, 186–202.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. *Donfrancesco, R., Iozzino, R., Caruso, B., Ferrante, L., Mugnaini, D., Talamo, A., et al. (2010). Is season of birth related to developmental dyslexia? Annals of Dyslexia, 60, 175–182.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-010-0037-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duval, S. J., & Tweedie, R. L. (2000a). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 56, 455–463.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duval, S. J., & Tweedie, R. L. (2000b). A nonparametric “trim and fill” method of accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 95, 89–98.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2000.10473905.Google Scholar
  16. Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ, 315, 629–634.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Erbeli, F., Hart, S. A., Wagner, R. K., & Taylor, J. (2017). Examining the etiology of reading disability as conceptualized by the hybrid model. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22, 167–180.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2017.1407321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fanelli, D. (2010). “Positive” results increase down the hierarchy of the sciences. PLoS ONE, 5(4), e10068.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Finucci, J. M., & Childs, B. (1981). Are there really more dyslexic boys than girls? In A. Ansora, A. Geschwind, A. Galaburda, M. Albert, & N. Gartrell (Eds.), Sex differences in dyslexia (pp. 1–9). Townson, MD: Orton Dyslexia Society.Google Scholar
  20. Fisher, Z., Tipton, E., & Hou, Z. (2016). Robumeta: Robust variance meta-regression. R package version 1.8. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=robumeta.
  21. *Flannery, K. A., Liederman, J., Daly, L., & Schultz, J. (2000). Male prevalence for reading disability is found in a large sample of black and white children free from ascertainment bias. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 6, 433–442.Google Scholar
  22. Fletcher, J. M., Stuebing, K. K., Morris, R. D., & Lyon, G. R. (2013). Classification and definition of learning disabilities: A hybrid model. In H. L. Swanson & K. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 33–50). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  23. * Flynn, J. M., & Rahbar, M. H. (1994). Prevalence of reading failure in boys compared with girls. Psychology in the Schools, 31, 66–71.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(199401)31:1%3C66::AID-PITS2310310109%3E3.0.CO;2-J.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Franco, A., Malhotra, N., & Simonovits, G. (2014). Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science, 345, 1502–1505.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Galaburda, A. M. (1999). Developmental dyslexia: A multilevel syndrome. Dyslexia, 5, 183–191.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0909(199912)5:4%3C183::AID-DYS147%3E3.0.CO;2-C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Geschwind, N., & Galaburda, A. M. (1985a). Cerebral lateralization: Biological mechanisms, associations, and pathology: I. A hypothesis and program for research. Archives of Neurology, 42, 428–459.  https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1985.04060050026008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Geschwind, N., & Galaburda, A. M. (1985b). Cerebral lateralization: Biological mechanisms, associations, and pathology: II. A hypothesis and a program for research. Archives of Neurology, 42, 521–552.  https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1985.04060060019009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gomez, R., Harvey, J., Quick, C., Scharer, I., & Harris, G. (1999). DSM-IV AD/HD: Confirmatory factor models, prevalence, and gender and age differences based on parent and teacher ratings of Australian primary school children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 40, 265–274.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Graetz, B. W., Sawyer, M. G., & Baghurst, P. (2005). Gender differences among children with DSM-IV ADHD in Australia. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 44, 159–168.  https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200502000-00008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hawke, J. L., Olson, R. K., Willcut, E. G., Wadsworth, S. J., & DeFries, J. C. (2009). Gender ratios for reading difficulties. Dyslexia, 15, 239–242.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hawke, J., Wadsworth, S., Olson, R., & DeFries, J. (2007). Etiology of reading difficulties as a function of gender and severity. Reading and Writing, 20, 13–25.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-006-9016-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hedges, L. V., Tipton, E., & Johnson, M. C. (2010). Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Research Synthesis Methods, 1, 39–65.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. *Jiménez, J. E., de la Cadena, C. G., Siegel, L. S., O’Shanahan, I., García, E., & Rodríguez, C. (2011). Gender ratio and cognitive profiles in dyslexia: A cross-national study. Reading and Writing, 24, 729–747.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9222-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jorm, A., Share, D., Matthews, R., & MacLean, R. (1986). Behaviour problems in specific reading retarded and general reading backwards children: A longitudinal study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 27, 33–43.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1986.tb00619.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. *Lewis, C., Hitch, G., & Walker, P. (1994). The prevalence of specific arithmetic difficulties and specific reading difficulties in 9- to 10-year-old boys and girls. Journal of Child Psychology, 35, 283–292.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1994.tb01162.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Liederman, J., Kantrowitz, L., & Flannery, K. (2005). Male vulnerability to reading disability is not likely to be a myth: A call for new data. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 109–129.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194050380020201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Limbrick, L., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2012). Reading and related skills in the early school years: Are boys really more likely to struggle? International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 59, 341–358.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2012.723939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lindgren, S. D., de Renzi, E., & Richman, L. C. (1985). Cross-national comparisons of developmental Dyslexia in Italy and the United States. Child Development, 56, 1404.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1130460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Logan, S., & Johnston, R. (2009). Gender differences in reading ability and attitudes: Examining where these differences lie. Journal of Research in Reading, 32, 199–214.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.01389.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lord, F. M. (1958). The utilization of unreliable difference scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 49, 150–152. http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0045456
  41. *Lovell, K., Shapton, D., & Warren, N. S. (1964). A Study of some cognitive and other disabilities in backward readers of average intelligence as assessed by a non-verbal test. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 34, 58–64.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1964.tb00605.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McGeown, S., Goodwin, H., Henderson, N., & Wright, P. (2012). Gender differences in reading motivation: Does sex or gender identity provide a better account? Journal of Research in Reading, 35, 328–336.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01481.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. *Miles, T. R., Haslum, M. N., & Wheeler, T. J. (1998). Gender ratio in dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 48, 27–55.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-998-0003-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Olson, R. (2002). Dyslexia: Nature and nurture. Dyslexia, 8, 143–159.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pansu, P., Régner, I., Max, S., Colé, P., Nezlek, J. B., & Huguet, P. (2016). A burden for the boys: Evidence of stereotype threat in boys' reading performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 65, 26–30.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.008.
  46. *Pennington, B. F., Gilger, J. W., Olson, R. K., & DeFries, J. C. (1992). The external validity of age- versus IQ-discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Lessons from a twin study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 562–573.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949202500904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. *Quinn, J. M., & Wagner, R. K. (2015). Gender differences in reading impairment and in the identification of impaired readers: Results from a large-scale study of at-risk readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 433–445.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413508323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Retelsdorf, J., Schwartz, K., & Asbrock, F. (2015). “Michael can’t read!” Teachers’ gender stereotypes and boys’ reading self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 186–194.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. *Rutter, M., Caspi, A., Fergusson, D., Horwood, J. L., Goodman, R., Maughan, B., et al. (2004). Sex differences in developmental reading disability: New findings from four epidemiological studies. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291, 2007–2012.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.16.2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. *Share, D. L., & Silva, P. A. (2003). Gender bias in IQ-discrepancy and post-discrepancy definitions of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 4–14.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194030360010201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shaywitz, S. (1998). Dyslexia. New England Journal of Medicine.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199801293380507.Google Scholar
  52. Shaywitz, S. E., Escobar, M. D., Shaywitz, B. A., Fletcher, J. M., & Makuch, R. (1992). Evidence that dyslexia may represent the lower tail of a normal distribution of reading ability. New England Journal of Medicine, 326, 145–150.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199201163260301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shaywitz, S. E., Morris, R., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2008). The education of dyslexic children from childhood to young adulthood. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 451–475.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. *Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A., Fletcher, J., & Escobar, M. D. (1990). Prevalence of reading disability in boys and girls. JAMA.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1990.03450080084036.Google Scholar
  55. Siegel, L. S. (1992). An evaluation of the discrepancy definition of dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 618–629.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949202501001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Siegel, L., & Smythe, I. (2005). Reflections on research on reading disability with special attention to gender issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 473–477.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194050380050901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Spencer, S. J., Logel, C., & Davies, P. G. (2016). Stereotype threat. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 415–437.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1998.1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Spencer, M., Wagner, R. K., Schatschneider, C., Quinn, J. M., Lopez, D., & Petscher, Y. (2014). Incorporating RTI in a hybrid model of reading disability. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(3), 161–171.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714530967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stanovich, K. E. (1988). Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and the garden-variety poor reader: The phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 590–604.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948802101003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. *Tourangeau, K., Nord, C., Lê, T., Sorongon, A. G., & Najarian, M. (2009). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 199899 (ECLS-K), Combined User’s Manual for the ECLS-K Eighth-Grade and K8 Full Sample Data Files and Electronic Codebooks (NCES 2009–004). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED511826.
  62. *Undheim, A. M., & Sund, A. M. (2008). Psychosocial factors and reading difficulties: Students with reading difficulties drawn from a representative population sample. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49, 377–384.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2008.00661.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36, 1–48. http://www.metafor-project.org/doku.php/metafor.
  64. Wheldall, K., & Limbrick, L. (2010). Do more boys than girls have reading problems? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 418–429.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409355477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Willcutt, E. G., & Pennington, B. F. (2000). Comorbidity of reading disability and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Differences by gender and subtype. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 179–191.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Willcutt, E. G., Pennington, B. F., & DeFries, J. C. (2000). Twin study of the etiology of comorbidity between reading disability and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 96, 293–301.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-8628(20000612)96:3%3C293::AID-AJMG12%3E3.0.CO;2-C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. *Wong, S. W. L., McBride-Chang, C., Lam, C., Chan, B., Lam, F. W. F., & Doo, S. (2012). The joint effects of risk status, gender, early literacy and cognitive skills on the presence of dyslexia among a group of high-risk Chinese children: Predicting the presence of dyslexia. Dyslexia, 18, 40–57.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational RiskThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations