Towards a dynamic, comprehensive conceptualization of dyslexia

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Maryanne Wolf, Rebecca J. M. Gotlieb, Sohyun An Kim, Veronica Pedroza, Laura V. Rhinehart, Maria Luisa Gorno Tempini, Sue Sears
{"title":"Towards a dynamic, comprehensive conceptualization of dyslexia","authors":"Maryanne Wolf,&nbsp;Rebecca J. M. Gotlieb,&nbsp;Sohyun An Kim,&nbsp;Veronica Pedroza,&nbsp;Laura V. Rhinehart,&nbsp;Maria Luisa Gorno Tempini,&nbsp;Sue Sears","doi":"10.1007/s11881-023-00297-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Here we build from the central strength of the existing definition of dyslexia—its emphasis on neurobiological origins—and proffer a set of seven core principles for a new, more comprehensive conceptualization of dyslexia. These principles derive from two major research directions: (1) the still evolving history of attempts to explain dyslexia, including in varied writing systems; and (2) the study of the reading brain circuit, its development, and its genetic and environmental influences. What emerges from connecting these two directions is a dynamic conceptualization of dyslexia that incorporates the extensive research on the heterogeneity of dyslexia and the interdependent contributions of multiple biological and socio-cultural risk and preventive factors. A new definition of dyslexia, therefore, needs to transcend both past unitary characterizations and past assumptions based largely on the English orthography. Such a conceptualization references the ways that different languages interact with the reading brain circuit to produce different sources of reading failure. Similarly, the characteristics and consequences of dyslexia that have been considered as secondary sequela (e.g., reduced reading comprehension, social-emotional issues) should be part of a more comprehensive narrative. Of critical importance, any definition of dyslexia should clarify persisting misconceptions that associate dyslexia with a lack of intelligence, potential to learn, or talents. Thus, the overall purpose of such a definition should serve as an instrument of knowledge and an enduring reason for pursuing growth in reading for the individual, the educator, and the public.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47273,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Dyslexia","volume":"74 3","pages":"303 - 324"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11881-023-00297-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Dyslexia","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11881-023-00297-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Here we build from the central strength of the existing definition of dyslexia—its emphasis on neurobiological origins—and proffer a set of seven core principles for a new, more comprehensive conceptualization of dyslexia. These principles derive from two major research directions: (1) the still evolving history of attempts to explain dyslexia, including in varied writing systems; and (2) the study of the reading brain circuit, its development, and its genetic and environmental influences. What emerges from connecting these two directions is a dynamic conceptualization of dyslexia that incorporates the extensive research on the heterogeneity of dyslexia and the interdependent contributions of multiple biological and socio-cultural risk and preventive factors. A new definition of dyslexia, therefore, needs to transcend both past unitary characterizations and past assumptions based largely on the English orthography. Such a conceptualization references the ways that different languages interact with the reading brain circuit to produce different sources of reading failure. Similarly, the characteristics and consequences of dyslexia that have been considered as secondary sequela (e.g., reduced reading comprehension, social-emotional issues) should be part of a more comprehensive narrative. Of critical importance, any definition of dyslexia should clarify persisting misconceptions that associate dyslexia with a lack of intelligence, potential to learn, or talents. Thus, the overall purpose of such a definition should serve as an instrument of knowledge and an enduring reason for pursuing growth in reading for the individual, the educator, and the public.

Abstract Image

实现动态、全面的阅读障碍概念化
在此,我们以阅读障碍现有定义的核心优势--强调神经生物学起源--为基础,提出了一套新的、更全面的阅读障碍概念化的七项核心原则。这些原则源自两个主要研究方向:(1) 尝试解释阅读障碍的历史仍在不断发展,包括各种书写系统;(2) 对阅读脑回路、其发展及其遗传和环境影响的研究。将这两个方向联系起来,就能形成一种动态的阅读障碍概念,其中包含对阅读障碍异质性的广泛研究,以及多种生物和社会文化风险及预防因素的相互依存作用。因此,阅读障碍的新定义需要超越过去的单一特征和过去主要基于英语正字法的假设。这种概念参考了不同语言与阅读脑回路相互作用的方式,从而产生不同的阅读障碍根源。同样,被视为继发性后遗症的阅读障碍的特征和后果(如阅读理解能力下降、社会情感问题等)也应成为更全面叙述的一部分。最重要的是,任何关于阅读障碍的定义都应澄清长期存在的误解,即认为阅读障碍与缺乏智力、学习潜力或天赋有关。因此,这样一个定义的总体目的应该是作为一种知识工具,以及作为个人、教育工作者和公众追求阅读进步的持久理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of Dyslexia
Annals of Dyslexia Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Annals of Dyslexia is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the scientific study of dyslexia, its comorbid conditions; and theory-based practices on remediation, and intervention of dyslexia and related areas of written language disorders including spelling, composing and mathematics. Primary consideration for publication is given to original empirical studies, significant review, and well-documented reports of evidence-based effective practices. Only original papers are considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信