Lexical Reading in Dysfluent Readers of German

Autor/inn/en	Gangl, Melanie; Moll, Kristina; Jones, Manon W.; Banfi, Chiara; Schulte-Körne, Gerd; Landerl, Karin
Titel	Lexical Reading in Dysfluent Readers of German
Quelle	In: Scientific Studies of Reading, 22 (2018) 1, S.24-40 (17 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Banfi, Chiara)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1088-8438
DOI	10.1080/10888438.2017.1339709
Schlagwörter	Dyslexia; German; Grade 3; Grade 4; Elementary School Students; Eye Movements; Reading Instruction; Intervention; Comparative Analysis; Foreign Countries; Student Characteristics; Reading Tests; Spelling; Children; Intelligence Tests; Questionnaires; Parent Attitudes; Phonemes; Visual Stimuli; Phonological Awareness; Attention; Culture Fair Tests; Germany; Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children; Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Dyslexics; Legasthenie; Lese-Rechtschreib-Schwäche; Deutscher; School year 03; 3. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 03; School year 04; 4. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 04; Augenbewegung; Leseunterricht; Ausland; Lesetest; Schreibweise; Child; Kind; Kinder; Intelligence test; Intelligenztest; Fragebogen; Elternverhalten; Fonem; Aufmerksamkeit; Deutschland
Abstract	Dyslexia in consistent orthographies like German is characterized by dysfluent reading, which is often assumed to result from failure to build up an orthographic lexicon and overreliance on decoding. However, earlier evidence indicates effects of lexical processing at least in some German dyslexic readers. We investigated variations in reading style in an eye-tracking paradigm with German dysfluent 3rd and 4th graders. Twenty-six TypFix-readers (fixation counts within the range of 47 age-matched typical readers) were compared with 42 HighFix-readers (increased fixation counts). Both groups showed lexical access: Words were read more efficiently than nonwords and pseudohomophones. TypFix-readers showed stronger reliance on lexical reading than HighFix-readers (smaller length effects for number of fixations and total reading time, stronger lexicality effects for gaze duration, stronger word-pseudohomophone effects for mean saccade amplitude). We conclude that in both groups, sublexical and lexical reading processes were impaired due to inefficient visual-verbal integration. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01