ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015
Discrete versus multiple word displays: a re-analysis of studies comparing dyslexic and typically developing children.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reading from Single Versus Multiple Displays: A Cross-Sectional Developmental Comparison.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Between-word processing and text-level skills contributing to fluent reading of (non)word lists and text.Reading and writing · 2025Article
- The metrics of reading speed: understanding developmental dyslexia.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Dyslexia Due to Visual Impairments.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Dyslexia: Causes and Concomitant Impairments.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- Success Is Not the Entire Story for a Scientific Theory: The Case of the Phonological Deficit Theory of Dyslexia.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Word- and Text-Level Processes Contributing to Fluent Reading of Word Lists and Sentences.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Reading and lexical-decision tasks generate different patterns of individual variability as a function of condition difficulty.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2018Article
- Using Serial and Discrete Digit Naming to Unravel Word Reading Processes.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- Predicting Reading and Spelling Disorders: A 4-Year Prospective Cohort Study.Frontiers in psychology · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study examines whether impairments in reading a text can be explained by a deficit in word decoding or an additional deficit in the processes governing the integration of reading subcomponents (including eye movement programming and pronunciation) should also be postulated. We report a re-analysis of data from eleven previous experiments conducted in our lab where the reading performance on single, discrete word displays as well multiple displays (texts, and in few cases also word lists) was investigated in groups of dyslexic children and typically developing readers. The analysis focuses on measures of time and not accuracy. Across experiments, dyslexic children are slower and more variable than typically developing readers in reading texts as well as vocal reaction time (RTs) to singly presented words; the dis-homogeneity in variability between groups points to the inappropriateness of standard measures of size effect (such as Cohen's d), and suggests the use of the ratio between groups' performance. The mean ratio for text reading is 1.95 across experiments. Mean ratio for vocal RTs for singly presented words is considerably smaller (1.52). Furthermore, this latter value is probably an overestimation as considering total reading times (i.e., a measure including also the pronunciation component) considerably reduces the group difference in vocal RTs (1.19 according to Martelli et al., 2014). The ratio difference between single and multiple displays does not depend upon the presence of a semantic context in the case of texts as large ratios are also observed with lists of unrelated words (though studies testing this aspect were few). We conclude that, if care is taken in using appropriate comparisons, the deficit in reading texts or lists of words is appreciably greater than that revealed with discrete word presentations. Thus, reading multiple stimuli present a specific, additional challenge to dyslexic children indicating that models of reading should incorporate this aspect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.