Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Auditory-visual and spatial-temporal integration abilities of above average and below average readers Marshall, Malcolm Frederick 1979

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1979_A2 M37.pdf [ 6.32MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0054419.json
JSON-LD: 1.0054419+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0054419.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0054419+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0054419+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0054419+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0054419 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0054419.txt
Citation
1.0054419.ris

Full Text

CO  AUDITORY-VISUAL AND SPATIAL-TEMPORAL INTEGRATION ABILITIES OF ABOVE AVERAGE AND BELOW AVERAGE READERS BY MALCOLM FREDERICK MARSHALL B.A., University of Otago, 1966 M.A. (Hons), University of Otago, 1968  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION in THE'FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Educational Psychology  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA February, 1979  (c) Malcolm Frederick Marshall, 1979  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesis  in p a r t i a l  fulfilment of  an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h the L i b r a r y s h a l l I  make i t  freely available  f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n  for  the requirements f o r  Columbia,  I agree  r e f e r e n c e and  f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f  this  study. thesis  f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department by h i s of  this  written  representatives. thesis  It  for financial  gain s h a l l  Department of  2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  Date  ^3>/f/77  or  i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n  permission.  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  that  Columbia  not be allowed without my  ABSTRACT Research S u p e r v i s o r :  Dr. R. F. Jarman  The need was p r e s e n t e d  f o r f u r t h e r research of reading a b i l i t i e s i n  t h e i r e a r l y development, w i t h emphasis on the i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the reader. sensory  The approach used was i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e  i n t e g r a t i o n and c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s i n g a b i l i t i e s o f above average  and below average r e a d e r s as i n f e r r e d f r o m cross-modal and i n t r a m o d a l m a t c h i n g o f v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l The  information.  tasks r e q u i r e d that a stimulus p a t t e r n presented  i n one m o d a l i t y  d i m e n s i o n be compared w i t h a second p a t t e r n i n e i t h e r t h e same o r a d i f f e r e n t modality dimension. of s t i m u l i  S u b j e c t s were r e q u i r e d t o c l a s s i f y p a i r s  ( s t a n d a r d and comparison) as same o r d i f f e r e n t .  m o d a l i t y dimensions,  namely a u d i t o r y temporal  With three  (AT), v i s u a l temporal ( V T ) ,  and v i s u a l s p a t i a l (VS), t h e r e were n i n e c o m b i n a t i o n s  of paired stimuli.  These were AT-AT, AT-VT, AT-VS, VT-AT, VT-VT, VT-VS?,. VS-AT, VS-VT, and VS-VS. To p r e s e n t t h e s e s t i m u l i f o r m a t c h i n g , i n a p r e c i s e and c o n s i s t e n t manner, n i n e c a s s e t t e tapes and two e l e c t r o n i c c i r c u i t s were c o n s t r u c t e d . S t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s were s e r i e s o f d o t s of a l i g h t bulb...  ( s l i d e s ) , a u d i t o r y beeps o r f l a s h e s  Each t a s k c o n t a i n e d 30 p a i r s o f items randomly  arranged  f o r sameness o r d i f f e r e n c e . S u b j e c t s were 72 boys and 72 g i r l s from 24 grade t h r e e c l a s s e s i n e i g h t North D e l t a S c h o o l s . readers  H a l f o f each sex group were above average  ( h i g h ) and h a l f were below average ( l o w ) .  matched f o r n o n - v e r b a l  intelligence.  The mean r e a d i n g grade l e v e l f o r  low r e a d e r s was 3.2 and f o r h i g h r e a d e r s 5.8. 94.  A l l f o u r groups were  Mean I.Q. f o r a l l groups was  S u b j e c t s i n s m a l l groups r e c e i v e d t h e n i n e t a s k s i n a  counterbalanced  iii  order  of presentation over  Analysis reading with  of variance high  results  readers  found  a period  o f 10 w e e k s .  showed a s i g n i f i c a n t  s u p e r i o r on a l l m a t c h i n g  main e f f e c t  was  VS p a t t e r n s  and t o t h e g r e a t e r d i f f i c u l t y  effect  was  sons.  A significant  standards the  also  made AT  reverse  held  interaction  there  across  visual, on  f o r low  analysed factor  tasks  readers.  modality tion,  was  only  showed  tasks  loadings  strong  to the  (easy)  A  strong  AT  standards,  comparison X o f AT  a n d VT  VT while  reading stimuli,  components s o l u t i o n  than  spatial  and low r e a d e r s  visual  with  varimax  indicated that  Pairwise  temporal  more d i f f i c u l t  two g r o u p s . and  Tasks  comparisons than  showed  intramodal  information  than  loaded  auditory.  t a s k s were e a s i e s t w h i l e  more d i f f i c u l t  processing  significantly  pooled  processing  purely  that  cross-  only f o r  i n the v i s u a l spatial  informa-  readers.  a n a l y s i s examined t h e d i s c r i m i n a t o r y power o f i t e m s  reliability.  compari-  i n d i c a t e d that  f o r sex, d a t a were  f o r high  factors rather  that purely  Similarly,  formula  main  were i n v o l v e d i n t h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f a u d i t o r y ,  i n terms of p o i n t b i s e r i a l  Richardson  interaction  A very  t o e a s i e r VS  than w i t h  A significant  by p r i n c i p a l  w e r e most d i f f i c u l t .  f o r low  An i t e m  due  interaction  main e f f e c t  modal matches were s i g n i f i c a n t l y low  stimuli  and t e m p o r a l i n f o r m a t i o n by t h e s e  and temporal  Inspection  due m a i n l y  o f VT s t a n d a r d s .  X comparison  was no s i g n i f i c a n t  spatial  tasks.  readers.  cognitive processes  spatial  temporal  standard  t h e same d i s o r d i n a l  Different  different  f o r the comparison  f o r VT c o m p a r i s o n s .  sex and f a c t o r  rotation.  stimulus  c o m p a r i s o n s more d i f f i c u l t  showed  particularly As  found  f o r the standard  main e f f e c t f o r  c o r r e l a t i o n s and i t e m  20 r e l i a b i l i t i e s  showed  the tasks  within the  structure.  Kuder-  t o be o f a d e q u a t e  iv  Findings were discussed  i n r e l a t i o n to the modality-specific view of  sensory functioning which appeared to apply only to low readers. were also discussed  Findings  i n terms of the writing of Luria, deriving from studies  of brain-behaviour relationships, and the paradigm of simultaneous and successive processing a r i s i n g out of Luria's work. Implications  of the findings f o r reading were drawn and some suggestions  as to how the findings might be applied to remedial practices were made.  V  TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS DEDICATION  viii ix x xi  CHAPTER I  INTRODUCTION  1  CHAPTER II  REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE  6  Sensory Modalities and Reading  6  Modality Matching and Reading  8  Test C e i l i n g and Low R e l i a b i l i t y  18  Presentation of Auditory Temporal Stimuli  20  Mediation i n Modality Matching  23  Memory i n Modality Matching  26  Developmental Trends and Matching D i f f i c u l t y  27  Sex and SES E f f e c t s  29  Intelligence and Modality Matching  30  Summary and Conclusions CHAPTER III  31  PROBLEM  35  Statement of the Problem  35  Rationale  36  Hypotheses  38  CHAPTER IV  METHOD  40  Subjects  40  Instruments and Scoring Procedure  41  Selection Instruments  42  vi Page Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests, Level C, Form 2  . .  Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test  42 43  Modality Matching Tests  44  V i s u a l s p a t i a l stimuli  44  Auditory temporal stimuli  45  Visual temporal stimuli  45  Scoring Procedures  47  Materials  47  Procedure  48  CHAPTER V  RESULTS  51  Subject C l a s s i f i c a t i o n s  51  Matching Tasks and C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Variables  53  Matching Task R e l i a b i l i t y  56  Mean Task Performance  58  Hypothesis 1  59  Task D i f f i c u l t y i n Cross-modal and Intramodal Matching.  59  Item Analyses  71  Item Complexity  72  Item Structure  72  Items Within Tasks  75  V i s u a l , Auditory, Spatial and Temporal Integrations.  76  Hypotheses 2.1 and 2.2  77  Cognitive Processes  78  Hypothesis 3  83  DISCUSSION  84  CHAPTER VI  Reading, Modality Matching and Intelligence Sex Differences i n Reading and Modality Matching  85 ...  89  vii Page Modality Matching and Reading  91  Stimulus Elements and Matching Task Performance  93  Implications f o r Reading REFERENCES  103 109  APPENDICES A  Matching Task Stimulus Patterns  118  B  Slide Duration Timing  121  C  Visual-Temporal Test Construction  124  D  Revised Slide Presentation Times  132  E  Script f o r Introduction of the Matching Tasks . . . .  134  F  P a r t i c i p a t i n g Schools  137  viii LIST OF TABLES Table  Page  1.  Variables to be Considered i n Modality Matching Research .  12  2.  Characteristics of Reading Groups  41  3.  R e l i a b i l i t y Data  42  4.  Correlations of Reading and I.Q. Measures  52  5.  Correlations of Modality Matching and Reading Measures: Boys  6.  53  Correlations of Modality Matching and Reading Measures: Girls  54  7.  Correlations of Matching Tasks and Non-Verbal I.Q  56  8.  R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s for Matching Tasks  57  9.  Mean Errors on Matching Tasks  58  10.  Differences Between Means for Pairwise Comparisons  . . . .  70  11.  Point B i s e r i a l Correlations for Discriminating Items . . .  73  12.  Intercorrelations of Matching Tasks for Low and High Readers  13.  P r i n c i p a l Components Analysis with Varimax  78 Rotation:  Low Readers 14.  P r i n c i p a l Components Analysis with Varimax High Readers  A.  Revised Slide Presentation Times  80 Rotation: 81 133  ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure  Page  1.  Test Stimuli Used by Birch and Belmont  13  2.  Arrangement of Spatial and Temporal Elements in Matching Tasks  3.  Orders of Presentation  .  46  of the Matching Tasks for Each of  the Groups Numbered One to Nine  49  4.  Sources of Main E f f e c t f o r Reading  60  5.  Sources of Main Effects for Standard and Comparison Stimuli  62  6.  Sources of Standard X Comparison Interaction  .  63  7.  Sources of Standard X Comparison X Reading Interaction  8.  Matching Task Error Scores for Reading Groups  9.  Matching Task Stimulus Patterns  119  10.  Power Supply  128  11.  Divider Section  130  12.  Tone Decoder  131  ...  65 68  X  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I would l i k e t o acknowledge my i n d e b t e d n e s s t o t h e E d u c a t i o n a l Research I n s t i t u t e o f B r i t i s h Columbia, t h e Canada C o u n c i l and t h e Canadian S o c i e t y f o r t h e Study o f E d u c a t i o n , f o r f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e i n t h e c a r r y i n g o u t o f t h i s r e s e a r c h and t h e w r i t i n g o f t h i s  thesis.  I would l i k e t o e x p r e s s my thanks to Dr. P. R. Koopman, Dr. 0. A. ( B u f f ) O l d r i d g e and Dr. J . S h a p i r o f o r guidance and h e l p as members o f my t h e s i s committee, and e s p e c i a l l y t o Dr. Ron Jarman, my t h e s i s s u p e r v i s o r and committee c h a i r m a n , w i t h o u t whose h e l p t h i s s t u d y would never have m a t e r i a l ized.  I am g r a t e f u l to Dr. N. O'Connor f o r h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n as e x t e r n a l  examiner, and t o t h e o t h e r members o f t h e examining  committee.  I would l i k e t o thank Tom Moore f o r c r e a t i n g t h e tapes and t h e e l e c t r o n i c c i r c u i t s , and Karen B l u n t f o r the t y p i n g o f b o t h p r o p o s a l and t h e s i s . I would l i k e t o e x p r e s s my a p p r e c i a t i o n t o t h e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f t h e D e l t a S c h o o l Board f o r p e r m i s s i o n to conduct t h e s t u d y , and i n p a r t i c u l a r the P r i n c i p a l s , t e a c h e r s and s t u d e n t s i n v o l v e d i n t h e s t u d y f o r t h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n and p a t i e n c e . To members o f my D a y s p r i n g F e l l o w s h i p f a m i l y , f o r p r a y e r , f i n a n c i a l , and p r a c t i c a l s u p p o r t - a s p e c i a l thankyou. F i n a l l y I would l i k e to acknolwedge my deep a p p r e c i a t i o n t o my two companions i n t h i s v e n t u r e :  t o my w i f e , S i l v i a , f o r c h e e r f u l l y p u t t i n g up  w i t h my absences and f o r g i v i n g up those e x t r a f a m i l y p l e a s u r e s , and t o my d a u g h t e r , K e l l y , whose l i f e began w i t h t h i s t h e s i s , and whose comment a t the age o f 20 months sums i t a l l up ... "Daddy gone ' B e r s i t y see Ron?".  xi  DEDICATION  TO THE MEMORY OF THE LATE PROFESSOR PHILIP ASHTON SMITHELLS PIONEER EDUCATIONALIST INSPIRER OF STUDENTS  CHAPTER I  INTRODUCTION  And so t o c o m p l e t e l y a n a l y s e what we do when we read would almost be t h e acme o f a p s y c h o l o g i s t ' s for  achievements,  i t would be t o d e s c r i b e v e r y many o f t h e most i n t r i c a t e  workings  o f the human mind, a s w e l l a s to u n r a v e l the  t a n g l e d s t o r y o f t h e most remarkable  s p e c i f i c performance  t h a t c i v i l i z a t i o n has l e a r n e d i n a l l i t s h i s t o r y . E. B. Huey (p. 6) I n s p i t e o f a w e a l t h o f r e s e a r c h , t h e r e c o n t i n u e s t o be a p o v e r t y o f s y s t e m a t i c knowledge about t h e p r o c e s s e s by which c h i l d r e n l e a r n t o r e a d . F a i l u r e to l e a r n t o read ranks among the most s e r i o u s e d u c a t i o n a l problems f a c i n g us today  (McGrady & O l s o n , 1970; Tower, 1973) .  Although incidence  v a r i e s from c o u n t r y t o c o u n t r y i t has been e s t i m a t e d t h a t i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s o f America,  some 10 t o 30 p e r c e n t o f s c h o o l c h i l d r e n do n o t read w e l l  enough t o meet t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s Gibson Canada.  o f s c h o o l and s o c i e t y (Bond & T i n k e r , 1973;  & L e v i n , 1975; K a r l i n , 1975).  A s i m i l a r t r e n d c o u l d be expected f o r  B e s i d e s b e i n g a problem t o h i m s e l f , t h e problem r e a d e r i n time  d e v e l o p s problems w i t h h i s p e e r s , a t s c h o o l and ait.•.home ( W i l s o n , 1972) . I t would be easy t o j u s t i f y f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i n r e a d i n g and r e a d i n g on these grounds a l o n e .  disabilities  However, t h e v e r y c o m p l e x i t y o f the p r o c e s s e s o f  l e a r n i n g t o read and t h e l a c k o f u n e q u i v o c a l r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s on what p r o c e s s e s l e a d t o e f f e c t i v e o r i n e f f e c t i v e r e a d i n g , demand t h a t  ongoing  r e s e a r c h i n t o r e a d i n g and r e a d i n g d i s o r d e r s be s u s t a i n e d and developed. Numerous approaches t o t h e s t u d y o f r e a d i n g have been t a k e n b u t the s u c c e s s of any p a r t i c u l a r approach i n f a c i l i t a t i n g t h e a c q u i s i t i o n  2  of r e a d i n g s k i l l s has not been o u t s t a n d i n g  (Belmont, 1974).  Curriculum  r e s e a r c h i n r e a d i n g has dominated t h e scene s i n c e 1920 w i t h o u t  consumers  b e i n g a b l e t o say t h a t any one method o f t e a c h i n g r e a d i n g i s b e t t e r than another.  Although  c u r r i c u l u m r e s e a r c h c o n t i n u e s , t h e o r y based r e s e a r c h on  how c h i l d r e n read i s a g a i n coming i n t o i t s own (Gibson & L e v i n , 1975). Theory-based r e s e a r c h , i n c o n t r a s t to a d d r e s s i n g t h e outcomes o f methods o f t e a c h i n g r e a d i n g , i s concerned w i t h the p r o c e s s e s  involved,  g u i d e d by t h e o r i e s o f r e a d i n g , p e r c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g and c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n ing.  As w i t h c u r r i c u l u m r e s e a r c h , however, theory-based  r e s e a r c h cannot  c l a i m much success i n c o n t r i b u t i n g t o r e d u c t i o n o f r e a d i n g f a i l u r e .  One  of the main reasons f o r t h i s i s t h a t approaches a r e o f t e n based upon u n t e s t e d h y p o t h e t i c a l g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s r a t h e r than d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s o f l e a r n i n g t a s k s and p e r c e p t i v e competencies i n v o l v e d i n r e a d i n g  (Belmont,  1974). A n a l y s i s o f t h e r e a d i n g p r o c e s s has taken many forms ( G i b s o n , 1969), i n c l u d i n g language, p s y c h o l o g i c a l , p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c and p h y s i o l o g i c a l approaches.  D e f i n i t i o n s of r e a d i n g have ranged from complex p e r c e p t u a l  d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s t o v e r b a l l y mediated comprehension o f meaning. p s y c h o l o g i c a l processes  i n v o l v e d i n r e a d i n g a r e numerous and complex, and  v a r y a t d i f f e r e n t s t a g e s of l e a r n i n g t o read 1969;  Vernon, 1971).  (Huey, 1968; M a c G i n i t i e ,  The b u l k o f r e s e a r c h appears t o support a g e n e r a l  schema i n v o l v i n g p e r c e p t i o n of g r a p h i c s t i m u l i , t r a n s f e r o f t h i s t i o n through  The  a mediating  informa-  p r o c e s s i n v o l v i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n and m o d i f i c a t i o n of  sensory d a t a , c u l m i n a t i n g i n a p e r c e p t u a l response w h i c h v a r i e s w i t h t h e m a t u r i t y and a b i l i t y o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l r e a d e r  ( C h e s t e r , 1974; Huey, 1968).  I t i s i n t h e c o n t e x t o f such schema t h a t t h i s study f i n d s i t s ' o r i e n t a t i o n .  3  Gibson and L e v i n (1975) suggest t h a t a l t h o u g h  reading u l t i m a t e l y  amounts to e x t r a c t i n g meaning and i n f o r m a t i o n from w r i t t e n t e x t , as p s y c h o l o g i c a l - p e r c e p t u a l processes foundations  reading  needs t o be f u r t h e r e x p l o r e d .  The  f o r l a t e r mature r e a d i n g f o r meaning l i e i n the p e r c e p t u a l l y  based s k i l l s and s t r a t e g i e s o f t h e f i r s t few y e a r s o f l e a r n i n g t o r e a d . C l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e p e r c e p t u a l approach to: r e a d i n g has been r e s e a r c h concerned w i t h sensory dynamics ( S i l v e r s t o n & Deichmann, 1975). Any  survey o f f a c t o r s which appear t o i n t e r a c t w i t h development o f e a r l y  r e a d i n g competence c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e s v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y (Robinson,  1972).  abilities  M o d a l i t y r e s e a r c h has l a r g e l y centered around t h e  r e l a t i v e importance o f these two s i n g l e m o d a l i t i e s and a n a l y s e s of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two m o d a l i t i e s . bases i n sensory  Such i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , w i t h  p e r c e p t i o n , have by t h e same token been deeply r o o t e d i n  c o g n i t i v e theory w h i c h concerns i t s e l f w i t h p e r c e p t u a l e x p e r i e n c e i n f o r m a t i o n s t o r a g e and i n f o r m a t i o n r e t r i e v a l 1975) .  their  data,  ( S i l v e r s t o n & Deichmann,  C o g n i t i v e theory p l a c e s p a r t i c u l a r emphasis on c e n t r a l b r a i n  f u n c t i o n i n g i n i t s a p p l i c a t i o n t o l e a r n i n g t a s k s such as r e a d i n g . emphasis i s e x p r e s s e d  This  i n a number o f approaches t o t h e o r i e s o f r e a d i n g ,  one of w h i c h i s known as t h e s t r a t e g y approach ( S i l v e r s t o n & Deichmann, 1975). The s t r a t e g y approach can be e x p r e s s e d  i n terms o f a d a p t i v e r u l e s  o r s t r a t e g i e s , c r e a t e d by t h e c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l , which m o t i v a t e  and enhance p e r c e p t u a l performance i n r e a d i n g .  dynamics e n t e r i n t o t h e p r o c e s s  Modality  of d e v e l o p i n g a d a p t i v e s t r a t e g i e s .  The  c l o s e l i n k and d e v e l o p m e n t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between p e r i p h e r a l s e n s o r y processes  and c e n t r a l p r o c e s s e s  i n c o n t r o l l i n g p e r c e p t i o n i s emphasized by  E l k i n d (1967), f o r example, i n a p p l y i n g P i a g e t ' s theory of p e r c e p t u a l  4  development to reading. The p r i n c i p l e s of perceptual learning are s u f f i c i e n t l y s p e c i f i c that when inadequately  incorporated into the cognitive functioning of  children, such children w i l l have d i f f i c u l t y i n learning to read 1972).  developing (Gredler,  Wepman too, (1968) stressed the necessity of establishing perceptual  bases of conceptual  learning.  While the danger exists of attempting to  "explain" reading d i s a b i l i t y on the basis of a p a r t i c u l a r bias or viewpoint, Gredler  (1972) considers that to explain adequately the d i f f e r e n t i a l  functioning of good and poor readers,  s p e c i f i c study of processes such as  intersensory integration need to be d i r e c t l y investigated. Huey (1968) considered  that i n studying reading, attention should  f i r s t be focussed on the perceptual functioning of the reader,  then upon  the perceptual aspects of the processed material, and f i n a l l y upon the higher-level cognitive operations by which the psychological r e s u l t s of the f i r s t two  stages are translated into meaning.  Sawyer (1974), l i k e  Huey, suggests that future e f f o r t s should focus on learning more about the learner, attending less to content and more to process.  She considers  that  the future concerns of remedial programs must range f a r beyond the mastery of reading  skills: We must begin to appreciate the human c h i l d as a highly complex processor  of information - more  complex, indeed, than the most sophisticated computer one might imagine-  So complex that the  finest minds of our time are c o l l e c t i v e l y unable to comprehend how  he learns what he learns as  rapidly as he learns, (p.  561)  5  In summary, the need i s presented for further research of reading a b i l i t i e s i n their early development.  At this stage, perceptual  develop-  ment and the integration of auditory and v i s u a l information i s p a r t i c u l a r l y important.  One approach to the study of early reading a b i l i t i e s i s to  investigate cognitive processing as inferred from a b i l i t y to integrate information within and between v i s u a l and auditory modalities.  A technique  of studying such auditory-visual integration i s known as cross-modal and intramodal matching of auditory and v i s u a l stimulus patterns.  A stimulus  pattern presented i n one modality i s followed by a comparison pattern i n a second modality, the subject being required to judge the equivalence of the two patterns.  Matching of patterns i n the same modality i s designated  intramodal matching.  For two patterns presented i n d i f f e r e n t modalities  a cross-modal match i s called f o r . A further consideration i s involved when v i s u a l stimuli can be presented in both a s p a t i a l and a temporal dimension.  Modality matching may thus be  viewed as requiring integrations within and between auditory and v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and temporal dimensions. This study attempts to c l a r i f y the role of some of the perceptually based s k i l l s and strategies involved i n reading by comparing the cross-modal, intramodal, s p a t i a l and temporal matching a b i l i t i e s of above average and below average boy and g i r l readers at the third grade l e v e l .  Differential  functioning of good and poor readers at such sensory integrations permits examination  of inferred cognitive processing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and i n v e s t i -  gation of the i n t e r a c t i o n of stimulus elements as integration requirements change from task to task.  An attempt i s also made to improve upon some  of the weaknesses of previous research, evident i n the reviewed l i t e r a t u r e .  6  CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE  For t h e l a r g e m a j o r i t y o f c h i l d r e n , p r o f i c i e n c y i n v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y p e r c e p t i o n and the i n t e g r a t i o n of t h e s e two m o d a l i t i e s a r e e s s e n t i a l t o a c h i e v e ment i n r e a d i n g . Ruth S t r a n g  (p. 139)  Sensory M o d a l i t i e s and Reading Considerable  research  i n r e c e n t y e a r s has examined the p l a c e o f  sensory systems i n c h i l d r e n ' s r e a d i n g Hammill & L a r s e n , Deichmann, 1975).  (Doehring,  1968; F r e i d e s , 1974;  1974; McNinch, 1971; R o b i n s o n , 1972; S i l v e r s t o n & Problems have l a r g e l y c e n t e r e d  around t h e r e l a t i v e  importance of e i t h e r v i s u a l o r a u d i t o r y m o d a l i t i e s , and the r e l a t i o n s h i p of i n t e r - - s e n s o r y and i n t r a s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n t o r e a d i n g a b i l i t y .  This  study proposes t o i n v e s t i g a t e the l a t t e r a s p e c t , namely t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of i n t r a m o d a l readers.  and i n t e r modal i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s o f good and poor  The term i n t e g r a t i o n i s used i n t h e sense t h a t p e r c e i v e d  i n f o r m a t i o n from one sense m o d a l i t y  i s a p p l i e d to a second  s i t u a t i o n e i t h e r i n the same or a d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t y ,  stimulus  stimulus  the i n f o r m a t i o n  being  used r e l a t i o n a l l y t o t h e degree r e q u i r e d by the c o g n i t i v e t a s k i n v o l v e d . Cross-modal r e s e a r c h has come a l o n g way s i n c e C o l e , Chorover and Ettlinger  (1961) f i r s t s t a t e d t h a t they found no e v i d e n c e f o r a u d i t o r y -  v i s u a l c r o s s - m o d a l matching i n man.  Sensory i n t e g r a t i o n can be r e g a r d e d  as a s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e p r o c e s s e s o f p e r c e p t u a l  7  organization and conceptualization at d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s and f o r d i f f e r e n t cognitive tasks (Bannatyne, 1968;  B i r c h & Bitterman, 1949).  Birch and  Belmont (1965) c i t e a growing body of evidence that i n t e g r a t i o n of  informa-  t i o n from d i f f e r e n t sensory modalities i s a basic mechanism subserving a l l adaptive f u n c t i o n i n g .  Birch and Bitterman  (1951) considered  that sensory  i n t e g r a t i o n or intersensory l i a i s o n i s foundational to judgement of stimulus equivalence  and of cross-modal and intramodal matching, and thus  i s basic to the process of reading  (Pollack, 1976).  Integration between the modalities involved i n pre-reading  perceptual  growth requires the r e l a t i n g of speech (auditory temporal) patterns to s p a t i a l l y ordered v i s u a l patterns (Birch & Belmont, 1964).  The act of  reading i s i n i t i a t e d by the matching or t r a n s f e r r i n g of v i s u a l s p a t i a l patterns to auditory temporal information (Bannatyne, 1968;  Beery,  1967;  Birch & Belmont, 1965; McGrady & Olson, 1970; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966). Analysis of the e a r l y reading process thus shows that s e v e r a l kinds of integrations among the auditory and v i s u a l modalities are c a l l e d f o r . Integrations w i t h i n modality  (intramodal) involve auditory temporal to  auditory temporal (AT-AT) and v i s u a l s p a t i a l to v i s u a l s p a t i a l (VS-VS) liaison.  In view of the sequential nature of reading along a l i n e of  p r i n t , i n t e g r a t i o n of a temporal element i s also involved f o r the v i s u a l modality  (Doehring, 1968;  Martin & Rudnick, 1971). i n t e g r a t i o n (VT-VT).  Rudnick, Martin & S t e r r i t t , 1972;  Sterritt,  This requires v i s u a l temporal to v i s u a l temporal  Between modality  (cross-modal) i n t e g r a t i o n s require  the organization and i n t e r - r e l a t i n g of s p a t i a l and temporal, v i s u a l information with auditory temporal input. combinations of inter-sensory i n t e g r a t i o n s :  This encompasses s i x f u r t h e r v i s u a l s p a t i a l to v i s u a l  temporal (VS-VT) and the reverse (VT-VS), v i s u a l s p a t i a l to auditory temporal (VS-AT) and the reverse (AT-VS), and v i s u a l temporal to auditory  8  temporal  (VS-AT) with i t s complement (AT-VS) (Rudnick et a l . , 1972;  S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971). H i s t o r i c a l l y the divergent views on the e s s e n t i a l contributions of audition and v i s i o n to processing information could be represented by 1. a modal s p e c i f i c view whereby each modality has s p e c i f i c and d i s t i n c t patterns of transduction, s p e c i f i c neural location and functions and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c sensory and perceptual q u a l i t i e s , and 2. an opposing amodal, supramodal or nonmodal view where a unitary modal-processing  of information  occurs with unique modal q u a l i t i e s overlooked (Ettlinger, 1967; Freides, 1974).  Although some elements of both views appear i n l i t e r a t u r e on  cross-modal function, the main approach taken by modality matching research infers a b a s i c a l l y modal s p e c i f i c view with some degree of rapprochement i n the area of sensory integration.  E t t l i n g e r (1967) presents something  of these opposing positions i n writing that i t i s not known for certain whether a single process of recognition takes place i n the one neural system regardless of sensory input mode, or i f recognition takes place i n a s p e c i f i c modality for s p e c i f i c s t i m u l i . It i s this lack of certainty together with clear necessity f o r integration of sensory information i n the process of reading that has contributed to the considerable amount of research i n the area.  Thus study  of i n t r a - and intersensory functioning f o r the auditory and v i s u a l channels is of s i g n i f i c a n t value for the study of learning disorders and i n p a r t i c u l a r i n the understanding, c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and remediation of children with reading disorders (Beery, 1967; McGrady & Olson, 1970).  Modality Matching and Reading One approach to the study of integration of auditory and v i s u a l modalities i n reading has been to compare the sensory integration a b i l i t i e s  9  o f normal and r e t a r d e d r e a d e r s .  B i r c h and Belmont (1964) were among t h e  f i r s t t o examine i n t e r s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n i n t h i s way, u s i n g analogous v i s u a l s p a t i a l and a u d i t o r y t e m p o r a l s t i m u l i c a l l i n g f o r c r o s s - m o d a l matching of t h e s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s . M o d a l i t y matching i n v o l v e s t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a s t i m u l u s o r s t a n d a r d p a t t e r n i n one m o d a l i t y f o l l o w e d by a comparison p a t t e r n i n a second m o d a l i t y , t h e s u b j e c t b e i n g r e q u i r e d t o judge t h e e q u i v a l e n c e the two p a t t e r n s .  M a t c h i n g o f p a t t e r n s i n the same m o d a l i t y i s d e s i g n a t e d  i n t r a m o d a l m a t c h i n g (IMM).  F o r two p a t t e r n s p r e s e n t e d  m o d a l i t i e s a c r o s s - m o d a l match (CMM) i s c a l l e d f o r . equivalence  o r match o f  i n different  In that judging  i s a r e q u i r e m e n t o f the t a s k , t h e s u b j e c t i s aware t h a t a  r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s between the s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s . Cross-modal matching (CMM) i s n o t to be confused w i t h c r o s s - m o d a l t r a n s f e r (CMT) w h i c h i n v o l v e s t r a n s f e r o f a l e a r n e d p r i n c i p l e f r o m o r i g i n a l to  concurrent  or  subsequent t a s k s ( B a i t e r & F o g a r t y ,  Goodnow, 1971a, 1971b; O'Conner & H e r m e l i n ,  1971).  1971; E t t l i n g e r , 1967;  I n CMT as d i s t i n c t f r o m  CMM the s u b j e c t i s n o t made e x p l i c i t l y aware o f any e q u i v a l e n c e between t h e two t a s k s .  W h i l e a c o n s i d e r a b l e t i m e i n t e r v a l may s e p a r a t e  t h e two s t i m u l u s  p r e s e n t a t i o n s i n CMT, f o r CMM t h e time i n t e r v a l i s r a r e l y l o n g e r than a few seconds. Another c o n f u s i o n among t h e r e s u l t s o f CMM s t u d i e s has due  also arisen  t o l a c k of i n t r a m o d a l c o n t r o l s ( B r y a n t , 1968; Holloway, 1971; J o n e s ,  1970;  M i l n e r & B r y a n t , 1970; Rae, 1977; R u b i n s t e i n & Gruenberg, 1971; von  W r i g h t , 1970).  E x c l u s i o n o f i n f o r m a t i o n on i n t r a m o d a l performance i s  c r i t i c a l i n c r o s s - m o d a l i n t e g r a t i o n r e s e a r c h s i n c e t h e r e i s no way o f knowing i f poor performance i s due t o f a i l u r e t o i n t e g r a t e i n f o r m a t i o n o r f a i l u r e t o d i s c r i m i n a t e r e l e v a n t s t i m u l u s a s p e c t s i n e i t h e r o r both o f  10  the m o d a l i t i e s concerned.  Lack  development  integration with  such  of  a case,  m e n t s due  age  to  of  scanning, by  data  the  the  standard S u c h an  cross-modal  of  specific)  the views  data of  poor  initial  or higher  are  foreshadowed  equivalence  depends on  properties  sampled  t i o n method w i l l properties. relevant  on  i n Goodnow's the  the  extent two  depend upon  Freides  for simpler  the  for reading  the  performance w i l l  interference  can  sound-sight  be  of  be.  the  t a s k may  taken  into  tasks  i n each matching perform  The  of  coming (modal  between  that  t o be  specific  the base  integra-  is view  holds  information.  i s a t t a i n e d , the more  readers,  of  essential  t h a t the more e a s i l y  correspondence l i e at  any  the nonmodal p o s i t i o n  If integration poor  sets  of  i t highlights  the modal  Freides  adjudged  superiority  pattern  the  f i n d i n g s of  correspondence that  if  a l l tasks.  some d e g r e e  to w h i c h  account  situation.  the  complex  seems  are  that  and  concerned.  Differences in  (1971a) s u g g e s t i o n  degree  d e m o n s t r a t e d by  reading  improve-  I t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e to  (nonmodal).  correspondence  in establishing  i n the  of  In  some  r e c e p t o r mechanism  information loads while  or  information  either  (1974) c o n c l u d e s  sight-sound reading  permits  occasions,  t r u e f o r the p r o c e s s i n g implication  from  permit  integration  identical  processes  data  stimuli  the v a r i o u s  research  cortical  considered.  separated  readers.  comparisons.  t h a t emphasize  (1974) a r e  stimuli  the  stimuli  matching  i s being  cross-modal  assessment r e q u i r e s t h a t a l l s u b j e c t s  together  The  age  c a n n o t be  good and  difficulty  comparison  Recent modality  largely  of  controls is also crucial i f  to d i s c r i m i n a t e i n the m o d a l i t i e s  in conjunction with  relative  and  ability  o r memory o f  and  intramodal  in integration  performance  coding,  intramodal  assess  changes  developing  Intramodal analysis  cross-modal  of  ability  for  i t suggests of  the v i s u a l  of  poor  the adequate  complex that and  reading  some  other  auditory  performance.  11  If the poor reader can integrate the simpler information but not the more complex, i t suggests that the c h i l d may be bound by i n i t i a l stimulus c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s or lack a mediational f a c i l i t y or rule for establishing correspondence  of cross-modal s t i m u l i .  If a strength i n one of the  modalities i s indicated, the effect of this strength as the i n i t i a l or standard stimulus modality or as the comparison modality may be investigated by analysis of interaction e f f e c t s .  This raises the question of s p a t i a l and  temporal conditions of presentation as well as the place of memory i n mediating the two conditions. Research to c l a r i f y some of these areas of p a r t i a l understanding has been steady i f not voluminous over the past decade and a half but due to methodological variations and inadequacies, a number of the key variables have not been examined systematically or controlled adequately enough to c l a r i f y some of the major issues a r i s i n g from sensory modality integration research (Silverston & Deichmann, 1975).  Chalfant and Scheffelin (1969)  have supplied a tabulation that includes many of the variables that need to be considered i n designing (see Table 1). of  Intramodal and cross-modal matching studies  Consideration of these variables serves to narrow the focus  the present review since the majority of the "organism" variables are  controlled by selection of the subjects (sex, age, organic  involvement)  while the majority of the remaining variables are controlled by the research design or have been s u f f i c i e n t l y examined by recent research.  Since Birch  and Belmont's (1964) o r i g i n a l study has set the scene and has highlighted a number of major areas of contention, their study serves to introduce some factors which d i r e c t l y influence the design and purpose of this study.  Table 1 Variables to be Considered i n Modality Matching Research Mode of Stimuli  Organism  Mode of Response  Intramodal  Sex  Intermodal  Intermodal  CA  Intramodal  Simultaneous presentation  MA  Successive presentation  I.Q.  Symbolic stimuli  Organic involvement  Symbolic a. motor b. vocal  Nonsymbolic stimuli  Prior experience or training  Intensity Number of units Rate Duration Interval Instructions Order Complexity Distortion  Nonsymbolic a. motor b. vocal Production a. latency of response b. duration of response c. frequency of response d. intensity of response Imitative response Judgemental response a. same b. different c. recognition d. r e c a l l e. equivalence f. correspondence g. recoding to a rule  13  The matching o f analogous a u d i t o r y t e m p o r a l (AT) and v i s u a l (VS) s t i m u l i w h i c h B i r c h and Belmont  spatial  (1964) employed has become known as  the B i r c h and Belmont t e s t (see F i g u r e 1)  AUDITORY TAP PATTERNS  VISUAL STIMULI EXAMPLES  A  ••  •  TEST ITEMS  2  •  3 4  •••  • ••  ••••  ••  •••>•  •••*>•  30  F i g u r e 1.  T e s t s t i m u l i used by B i r c h and Belmont.  . A u d i t o r y p a t t e r n s were tapped on a t a b l e top i n the s u b j e c t ' s view a f t e r which t h e s u b j e c t chose t h e m a t c h i n g v i s u a l dot p a t t e r n from among three a l t e r n a t i v e s presented  on c a r d s .  F o r n i n e and t e n - y e a r - o l d boys,  good r e a d e r s made s i g n i f i c a n t l y fewer e r r o r s than r e t a r d e d suggesting  readers,  t h a t t h e y d e a l t more e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h t a s k s r e q u i r i n g a u d i t o r y -  v i s u a l matching o f s t i m u l i .  W i t h i n t h e two r e a d i n g groups t h e r e were a l s o  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a d i n g a b i l i t y between those who were h i g h and low on the A-V a b i l i t y t e s t .  The r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e l l i g e n c e , A-V  i n t e g r a t i o n and r e a d i n g , and t h e p l a c e o f memory, w h i c h they a l s o s t u d i e d ,  14  w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n l a t e r s e c t i o n s of t h i s r e v i e w .  They c o n c l u d e d t h a t  one o f the c o n t r i b u t i n g f a c t o r s o f r e a d i n g d i f f i c u l t i e s was poor d e v e l o p ment of i n t e r s e n s o r y  integration.  A number of weaknesses were apparent i n t h e i r study and  subsequent  s t u d i e s have attempted t o remove those weaknesses., u n f o r t u n a t e l y i n the p r o c e s s a d d i n g f u r t h e r v a r i a b l e s or v a r i a t i o n s w h i c h have made f i n d i n g consensus d i f f i c u l t .  Among the major weaknesses,  together with l a t e r  s t u d i e s w h i c h r e p l i c a t e d those weaknesses, a r e the f o l l o w i n g :  (a) low  c e i l i n g o f the t e s t ( B i r c h & Belmont, 1965; H o l l o w a y , 1971; K l a p p e r & B i r c h , 1971; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; R e i l l y , 1971), (b) l a c k of c o n t r o l of v i s u a l cues d u r i n g the t a p p i n g p a t t e r n s , thus c o n f u s i n g a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l s t i m u l i and i n t r a m o d a l w i t h c r o s s - m o d a l m a t c h i n g ( B i r c h & Belmont, Holloway, 1971; R e i l l y , 1971; Rudnick, S t e r r i t t & F l a x , 1967;  1965;  Sterritt  & Rudnick, 1966); (c) i m p r e c i s i o n and v a r i a t i o n i n p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the AT s t i m u l i (Becker & S a b a t i n o , 1971; B i r c h & Belmont, 1965; Ford,' 1967; Goodnow, 1971a; Kahn & B i r c h , 1968; R e i l l y , 1971; Rudnick, S t e r r i t t & F l a x , 1967; S t e r r i t t .& Rudnick, 1966); (d) u n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e samples  (Birch  & Belmont, 1965; Rudnick, S t e r r i t t & F l a x , 1967; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966); (e) of  l a c k of d a t a on the r e l i a b i l i t y o f the t e s t , p a r t i c u l a r l y .in t h e l i g h t the s m a l l number of items ( s i x t o ten) (Beery, 1967; B i r c h & Belmont,  1965; Kuhlman & W o l k i n g , 1972; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; R u d n i c k ,  Sterritt  & F l a x , 1967; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966); ( f ) no c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e v i s u a l ,to  a u d i t o r y a s p e c t of r e a d i n g ( F o r d , 1967; .Jones, 1970; Kahn & B i r c h ,  Rae, 1977; R e i l l y , Rudnick, 1966).  1968;  1971; Rudnick, S t e r r i t t & F l a x , 1967; S t e r r i t t &  I n a d d i t i o n , a number of s t u d i e s have c o n f u s e d the t e m p o r a l -  s p a t i a l a s p e c t s of p e r c e p t i o n v i a the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y .  These weaknesses,  t o g e t h e r w i t h some of the attempts made to c o n t r o l them, and major  variables  15  to be c o n s i d e r e d later  i n this Not  Chalfant  processes  The o r i g i n a l  m e t h o d was  a l s o u s e d by B e e r y  and  (1972) .  A second  readers  summarized  (Birch  & Belmont,  Rudnick,  Sterritt  & Flax,  1967),  after,  Sterritt  & Rudnick,  t o t h e AVI t e s t i n g , subjects  1966) o r s o m e t i m e treating  into  reading  groups.  d i d so i n a  used p r e v i o u s l y  f o r comparison.  to test  1965; M u e h l  (Ford,  This  ability  Senf  the childrenf o r  & K r e m e n a k , 1966;  1 9 6 7 ; K a h n & B i r c h , 1968;  (Rae, 1977; R e i l l y ,  Other major  variety  (1972) a n d Vande V o o r t ,  o f a p p r o a c h was  before,  sensory  s t u d i e s which d i d  (1964) s t u d y  (1967), Bryden type  Those  as s u b j e c t s  abilities  dividing  be  related  o f AVI to r e a d i n g ,  B i r c h and Belmont  groups o f good and poor  Benton  a n d IMM h a v e  or difficulties.  c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n  selected  1969) w i l l  review.  to r e a d i n g  of manners.  reading  & Scheffelin,  a l l o f t h e many s t u d i e s o n CMM  integration include  (after  1971) i n r e l a t i o n  as a c o n t i n u u m studies  rather  d i d not assess  than reading  abilities. Of  the s t u d i e s which  standardized  assessed  t e s t s were used.  reading,  a variety  B i r c h and Belmont  word knowledge, word d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and o r a l divided  subjects on t h e b a s i s o f o r a l  ability.  B i r c h and Belmont  measures f o r grade some o f t h e o l d e r  subjects.  readiness.  related  AVI t o r e a d i n g  Sterritt  related  (1964) u s e d m e a s u r e s o f  reading.  Beery  (1967)  b u t compared groups on AVI  a v a i l a b l e reading  readiness  AVI a b i l i t y  was  and Rudnick  (1966) and R u d n i c k  comprehension,  knowledge and comprehension, subtests  (1965) u s e d  and  one c h i l d r e n a n d w h a t e v e r m e a s u r e s w e r e a v a i l a b l e f o r  reading  readiness  reading  of aspects  and Muehl  and r e a d i n g  Kahn and B i r c h a n d Kremenak  achievement  i n t e g r a t i o n to paragraph  correlated with  reading  a year  and words  reading et a l .  and  (1967)  (1968) t o word (1966)  later.  to pre-reading Ford  i n isolation  (1967) while  Vande  16  Voort  and Senf  different  (1973) u s e d  t e s t s were used,  commonly u s e d b e i n g In  addition  varied  2-6, 3, 3-4, 3 - 7 ( 2 ) ,  used  boys as s u b j e c t s  Reading  with  o f I.Q. r a n g e s .  i ti s difficult  picture  For several  to interpret  established,  t h e ages o f  common g r o u p s  At l e a s t  studies  as  grade  g r o u p s were i n c l u d e d  integration  to r e a d i n g  with  studies  and a  skills  is fairly  of reading  still  a  clear  performance.  a breakdown o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e components o f integration  (2),  t h e mean I.Q. was 1 2 0 o r a b o v e .  r e l a t i o n s h i p between AVI and r e a d i n g  modal and i n t r a m o d a l  1  were boys and  the r e s u l t s as f a ras d e v e l o p i n g  of sensory  subjects  follows  seven of the major  i n t w e l v e o r more t h e s u b j e c t s  of the contribution  the general  Tests.  t h e most  A number o f d i f f e r e n t s o c i o - e c o n o m i c  number  t h e most  K, K-2, K-3, K-4, K - 6 ( 2 ) ,  ( 3 ) a n d 5.  while  Some t e n o r m o r e  i n t h e r e a d i n g measures,  to adults,  4  i n isolation.  a wide v a r i e t y o f measures,  i n parentheses):  1-4,  While  giving  to the variations  (numbers o f s t u d i e s  Thus  t h e words  t h e Gates M a c G i n i t i e  from p r e - s c h o o l e r s  girls.  only  well cross-  needs  further  research. The  major  findings  o f those  to  r e a d i n g a r e summarized  1.  Cross-modal matching  Belmont,  as  Kahn and B i r c h ,  was h i g h e r  1967; B r y d e n ,  1967; Muehl  & Kremenak,  R u d n i c k e t a l . , 1967; S h a r a n  & Calfee,  Vande V o o r t  e t a l . , (1972).  With  the  studies  various  to  grade  six.  in  Birch  and Belmont  variance studies  showed  The d e c l i n e  opposed  that  1972; F o r d ,  integration  this  readers  (Birch  &  1 9 6 7 ; J o n e s , 1970;  1 9 6 6 ; R a e , 1977; R e i l l y , 1 9 7 1 ; 1977; S t e r r i t t  & R u d n i c k , 1966;  of Birch  relationship held  of significant  relationship  (1965) i s q u e s t i o n a b l e  Birch  sensory  f o r better  the exception  o f s c o r e s and thus d e c r e a s e d also  which r e l a t e d  follows:  ability  1964, 1 9 6 5 ; B e e r y ,  studies  since  and Belmont's  conclusion.  (1965)  f o r a l l g r a d e s up f o rhigher  ceiling  the correlations.  and Belmont  effects Findings  grades reduced of other  17  2.  W h i l e some s t u d i e s r e l a t e d i n t e g r a t i o n to r e a d i n g i n g e n e r a l ,  Birch  and Belmont s p e c i f i e d the s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p of i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h word knowledge, word d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and o r a l r e a d i n g .  Kahn and B i r c h  (1968)  s t u d i e d the r e l a t i o n s h i p of s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h word knowledge  and  comprehension, F o r d (1967) w i t h two measures each of v o c a b u l a r y and o r a l r e a d i n g , Muehl and Kremenak (1966) w i t h comprehension, Rae (1977) w i t h comprehension, Jones (1970) and R e i l l y  (19 72) w i t h v o c a b u l a r y and compre-  h e n s i o n , Vande V o o r t e t a l . (1972) w i t h words i n i s o l a t i o n , and Bryden (1972) w i t h a composite of v o c a b u l a r y , speed and a c c u r a c y and _3.  comprehension.  With the e f f e c t s o f i n t e l l i g e n c e taken i n t o account o r a d e q u a t e l y  c o n t r o l l e d , a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n i s independently s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d t o r e a d i n g ( B i r c h & Belmont, 1964; B e e r y , 1967; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick e t a l . , 1967; S t e r r i t & R u d n i c k , 1966).  F o r d (1967) found  the r e l a t i o n s h i p l o s t s i g n i f i c a n c e w i t h i n t e l l i g e n c e c o n t r o l l e d . (1970) and Kahn and B i r c h  Jones  (1968) found t h a t word knowledge and AVI were  s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d w i t h i n t e l l i g e n c e c o n t r o l l e d but t h a t compreh e n s i o n and AVI c o r r e l a t i o n s  tended to l o s e t h e i r s i g n i f i c a n c e .  and Hyde (1974) found AVI c o r r e l a t e d  Jorgensen  s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h vocabulary but not  comprehension f o r grade one and two c h i l d r e n .  Bryden (1972) w i t h  I.Q.  c o n s t a n t , found p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s between r e a d i n g and m a t c h i n g , w i t h v a l u e s of .14 f o r good r e a d e r s and .60 f o r poor r e a d e r s , c o n c l u d i n g t h a t the r e l a t i o n of r e a d i n g t o m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g was 4.  non-linear.  V a r i o u s c r o s s - m o d a l matching t a s k s are s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of  r e a d i n g performance.  These i n c l u d e A-VS,  a c c o u n t i n g f o r 11 and 23 p e r c e n t  of r e a d i n g v a r i a n c e r e s p e c t i v e l y , i n Rudnick e t a l (1967) and S t e r r i t t and Rudnick (1966).  I n the Rudnick e t a l . (1967) s t u d y , VT-VS a c c o u n t e d f o r  14 p e r c e n t of the r e a d i n g v a r i a n c e .  Muehl and Kremenak (1966) found t h a t  18  only VS-A  and A-VS  contributed as s i g n i f i c a n t predictors of grade one  reading.  For reading readiness they found only l e t t e r naming was  ficant, predictor of l a t e r reading, and VS-A with l e t t e r naming.  correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y  Beery (1967) found that VS-A matching discriminated  between good and poor readers. A-VS was  and A-VS  a signi-  She also concluded  that either VS-A  or  equally useful i n discriminating between good and poor readers  since the lower A-VS  scores might have been due to unequal opportunities  for guessing when tests had unequal numbers of patterns to choose from in the comparison conditions.  Bryden (1972) concluded  that although good  readers are superior on a l l nine combinations of matching tasks, only VT-A,  A-A,  VT-VS, and VS-VT give s i g n i f i c a n t differences between good and poor  readers. In examining the influence of the dominant p a r i e t a l cortex on CMM  A-VS  tasks and VS-VS and A-A intramodal matching, Butters and Brody (1968)  found s p e c i f i c l o c a l i z a t i o n s i n the dominant hemisphere for cross-modal and intramodal integrations and concluded that AVI capacities serve as prerequisites for attainment of reading s k i l l s .  Although  there i s a clear  relationship of sensory integration and reading, many aspects of the relationship s t i l l need to be further explored.  Test Geiling and Low  Reliability  Although s i g n i f i c a n t relationships were found among the variables studied (Birch & Belmont, 1964,  1965;  Klapper & Birch, 1971; Muehl &  Kremenak, 1966; R e i l l y , 1971), low c e i l i n g effects make some of the results questionable.  L e v e l l i n g - o f f effects of AVI a b i l i t i e s with increasing age  were p a r t i c u l a r l y influenced by predominance of easy items.  Easy items  also caused skewed results and reduced v a r i a b i l i t y of scores, with resulting  19  implications for inferential s t a t i s t i c s .  Beery  (1967), F o r d (1967) and  Kahn and B i r c h (1968) i n c r e a s e d the number of items i n the B i r c h Belmont t e s t from 10 to 20 i n o r d e r to g i v e g r e a t e r c e i l i n g and S u b s e q u e n t l y , Bryden  (1972), Rae  (1977), R e i l l y  and reliability.  (1971), Sharan and C a l f e e  (1977), and Vande V o o r t , Senf and Benton (1972) employed 20 items i n t h e i r m o d a l i t y matching s t u d i e s . and S t e r r i t t  Becker and S a b a t i n o (1971), R u d n i c k , M a r t i n  (1972) and S t e r r i t t , M a r t i n and Rudnick  (1971) added two  items  to e x t e n d e i t h e r the c e i l i n g , or i n the case of Becker and S a b a t i n o the f l o o r , of the t e s t s . was  The most o b v i o u s e f f e c t o f i n c r e a s e d numbers of items  to r a i s e the asymptote found by B i r c h and Belmont (1964) a t t h e Grade  5 level.  Kahn and B i r c h (1967) u s i n g a 20 i t e m e x t e n s i o n of the AVI  w i t h unseen t a p p i n g o f t h e AT p a t t e r n o b t a i n e d t e s t - r e t e s t  test  reliabilities  a f t e r 10 days of .76 and .90 f o r t h i r d grade and f i f t h grade boys r e s p e c t i v e l y . While few o t h e r s t u d i e s have r e p o r t e d r e l i a b i l i t y  d a t a f o r the AVI  t e s t , Becker and S a b a t i n o (1971) concluded t h a t t h e B i r c h and Belmont AVI t e s t c o u l d p r o v i d e r e l i a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n as e a r l y as grade 1 i n a group t e s t i n g s e t t i n g and w i t h the t a p p i n g a c t i o n c o n c e a l e d from s u b j e c t s ' v i e w . For ages f i v e , s i x , seven and e i g h t the t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y were r e s p e c t i v e l y  .34,  .90, .92,  .75.  Rae  coefficients  (1977) w i t h nine" and t e n y e a r  o l d s i n s m a l l group s e t t i n g s used a m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n of the B i r c h and Belmont t e s t extended  to twenty i t e m s .  .82 u s i n g t h e K u d e r - R i c h a r d s o n  He o b t a i n e d a r e l i a b i l i t y twenty f o r m u l a .  F o r d (1967) p o i n t e d out  the c o n t i n u i n g need n o t o n l y f o r more c l e a r cross-modal a t t e n t i o n to be g i v e n t o , " - . reliability  c o e f f i c i e n t of  t a s k s , but a l s o f o r  the more mundane p s y c h o m e t r i c c r i t e r i a  and sample s i z e s " (p. 840).  of  20  P r e s e n t a t i o n of A u d i t o r y Temporal  Stimuli  The o r i g i n a l method of t a p p i n g t h e a u d i t o r y p a t t e r n i n f u l l v i e w of the s u b j e c t s added a v i s u a l component w h i c h l a t e r s t u d i e s t r i e d t o remove. F o r d (1967), Goodnow (1971a), Kahn and B i r c h (1968) and Becker and S a b a t i n o (1971) employed an unseen t a p p i n g system, under the t a b l e w i t h arm s h o u l d e r movements c o n c e a l e d .  As e a r l y as 1966  and  S t e r r i t t and Rudnick  i n t r o d u c e d taped a u d i t o r y tone beeps o f 1000 Hz, v i a headphones, as the a u d i t o r y s t i m u l i to be matched.  Beery (1967) a l s o s y s t e m a t i z e d p r e s e n t a t i o n  of a u d i t o r y s t i m u l i u s i n g a B e l l and H o w e l l Language Master and l o u s p e a k e r c o n n e c t i o n to a soundproof room.  The tones were 500 c y c l e s per second.  Vande V o o r t , Senf and Benton (1972) a l s o used t h e Language M a s t e r w i t h 1000 Hz t o n e s .  Muehl and Kremenak (1966) removed the v i s u a l element by  u s i n g a t e l e g r a p h key, s t i l l m a n u a l l y o p e r a t e d .  T h i s method was  later  used by Bryden (1972), K l a p p e r and B i r c h (1971), and Kuhlman and W o l k i n g (1972) . The t e c h n i q u e employed by S t e r r i t t e t a l .  (1971) and Rudnick e t a l .  (1972) p r e s e n t e d 1000 Hz and 1200 Hz tones v i a headphones, the two f r e q u e n c i e s b e i n g used t o s e p a r a t e the s t a n d a r d and comparison s t i m u l i . (1977a, 1977b, 1978) and Rae  F i n a l l y Jarman  (1977) used tape r e c o r d e d tones of 1000  Hz  and 800 Hz r e s p e c t i v e l y . W h i l e a v a r i e t y o f s t i m u l i l e n g t h s and i n t e r v a l d u r a t i o n s were u s e d , the, m a j o r i t y used a beep d u r a t i o n of about  .15 t o .25 s e e s , a s h o r t i n t e r v a l  of .35 to .5 sees and a l o n g i n t e r v a l of 1 to 1.35  sees.  The times between  p a i r s o f s t i m u l i have u s u a l l y ranged from one t o two seconds, w i t h l o n g e r p e r i o d s i n s t u d i e s s p e c i f i c a l l y t e s t i n g f o r memory e f f e c t s .  While i t i s  d i f f i c u l t t o know t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of such p r a c t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s , t h e methodology  v a r i a b i l i t y and c o n f u s i o n o f v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y i n p u t have,  by t h e s e methods, been more a d e q u a t e l y c o n t r o l l e d .  21  The confusion of s p a t i a l and temporal dimensions i n the e a r l i e r studies occurred i n the matching of VS and AT patterns, thus c a l l i n g for two types of integration, auditory to v i s u a l and temporal to s p a t i a l .  The Rudnick  et a l . (1972) and S t e r r i t t et a l . (1971) studies represented the f i r s t attempt to d i f f e r e n t i a t e these factors i n modality matching. studies including Rubinstein and Gruenberg  A number of  (1971) had observed the need  for control of spatial-temporal transformations and also the need f o r study of the complement of A-V integration (V-A) and of the intramodal pairings, A-A and V-V.  To make v a l i d comparisons between intramodal and  cross-modal matches, a l l possible combinations would need to be included. Muehl and Kremenak (1966) had added intramodal controls, the V-A complement, and changed the response mode from choice of one among three possible matches to a two choice, same/different format.  At the same time  they used d i f f e r e n t sets of stimulus items f o r each task, thus including a possible task difference factor.  The cross-modal task s t i l l involved the  spatial-temporal confusion. Rubinstein and Gruenberg the  (1971) changed a l l the patterns to include  same number of elements, including a l l temporal combinations, the  only i d e n t i f i c a t i o n required being the location of the long i n t e r v a l among the s t i m u l i .  They used fast and slow presentations, with adult  subjects, for the four combinations, AT-AT, VT-VT, AT-VT, VT-AT. found VT patterns more d i f f i c u l t  They  to match than AT and cross-modal matches  as easy as intramodal for a slow rate of presentation. of presentation cross-modal matches were more d i f f i c u l t .  For a fast rate Symmetric  standard patterns were easier to match than asymmetric. Thus the Rudnick et a l . (1972) and Sterritt et al.(1971) studies marked a s i g n i f i c a n t step i n generating a l l nine possible combinations of  22  s t i m u l u s and  r e s p o n s e p a t t e r n s , c o v e r i n g a l l d i m e n s i o n s of i n t e g r a t i o n .  U s i n g headphones, lamps, p r i n t e d d o t s and a s a m e / d i f f e r e n t  response format,  they i n c l u d e d AT-VS, VS-AT, AT-VT, VT-AT, VT-VS, VS-VT, AT-AT, VS-VS VT-VT m a t c h i n g s .  They found the AV and  d i f f i c u l t y to r e s p e c t i v e intramodal  TS  and  i n t e g r a t i o n s were s i m i l a r i n  integrations.  E a s i e s t t a s k s were  v i s u a l s p a t i a l m a t c h i n g s , more d i f f i c u l t were mixed v i s u a l s p a t i a l  and  i  t e m p o r a l m a t c h i n g s and most d i f f i c u l t were p u r e l y t e m p o r a l m a t c h i n g s . V i s u a l and for  a u d i t o r y m o d a l i t y r o l e s appeared to be of l i t t l e s i g n i f i c a n c e  i n d i c a t i n g i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s compared to the  dimension. previous  temporal-spatial  A p l a u s i b l e c o n c l u s i o n c o u l d be t h a t poor CMM  s t u d i e s may  have been due  than v i s u a l - a u d i t o r y .  The  performance i n  to the t e m p o r a l - s p a t i a l v a r i a b l e r a t h e r  Goodnow (1971a) and K l a p p e r and  B i r c h (1971)  s t u d i e s produced s i m i l a r f i n d i n g s . The  q u e s t i o n r a i s e d by the m o d a l i t y  s p e c i f i c view i s r a i s e d again i n  c o n s i d e r i n g whether space i s b e s t approached by v i s i o n and b e s t s e r v e d by a u d i t i o n . the i n p u t m o d a l i t y than the p h y s i c a l . organized and  O'Connor and H e r m e l i n (1971, 1972)  d e t e r m i n e s the c o n c e p t u a l T h e i r 1972  organization.  that  temporally.  When s p a t i a l  the modality  of  input  Kuhlman and WoIking (1972) drew  much the same c o n c l u s i o n i n s a y i n g the IMM  and  CMM  t a s k s were not  c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t when b o t h b e g i n w i t h t h e same m o d a l i t y .  This  the need f o r f u r t h e r i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s t u d i e s of s t a n d a r d  The  concluded  s t u d y showed the v i s u a l i t e m s were  t e m p o r a l s t i m u l i were p r e s e n t e d s i m u l t a n e o u s l y  c o n d i t i o n s f o r v i s u a l and  perception  o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space r a t h e r  s p a t i a l l y and a u d i t o r y items o r g a n i z e d  determined the p e r c e p t u a l  temporal  and  signifi-  points comparison  auditory modalities.  R u d n i c k e t a l . (1972) and  S t e r r i t t e t a l . (1971) s t u d i e s r a i s e d  i s s u e s s i n c e s u b j e c t s were : i m p o v e r i s h e d b l a c k and  chicano  kindergarten  23  and f i r s t grade c h i l d r e n .  Q u e s t i o n s r a i s e d i n c l u d e the p o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e  of poor language s k i l l s on m e d i a t i o n i n matching o r i n t e m p o r a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n .  Mediation i n Modality Matching B i r c h and Belmont's o r i g i n a l l y propounded v i e w t h a t m o d a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s mediated s e n s o r y m a t c h i n g was r e j e c t e d by B l a n k and B r i d g e r i n f a v o u r of h i g h e r o r d e r p r o c e s s e s . al.  (1972) and S t e r r i t t e t a l .  (1964)  As i n d i c a t e d from the Rudnick e t  (1971) s t u d i e s , t h e r o l e of language appears  t o be a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g . The r o l e of language i s l i k e l y t o v a r y from t a s k t o t a s k and  adequate  v e r b a l i z a t i o n i s p r o b a b l y n o t a s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n f o r CMM  to o c c u r  ( B l a n k & B r i d g e r , 1964; O'Connor & H e r m e l i n , 1971). p o i n t s out t h a t CMM may may  Ettlinger  (1967)  o c c u r w i t h or w i t h o u t t h e a i d of v e r b a l i z a t i o n and  take place a t a perceptual l e v e l without verbal mediation.  The q u e s t i o n  seems n o t t o be whether language i s n e c e s s a r y f o r m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g a b i l i t y b u t r a t h e r , i n what ways i t may (von W r i g h t , 1970). s u b j e c t s may  be used to f a c i l i t a t e  performance  Jones and Robinson (1973) c o n s i d e r e d t h a t i n  CMM,  be f o r c e d t o use v e r b a l c o d i n g as m e d i a t i o n between m o d a l i t i e s ,  which h e l p s t o account f o r v i s u a l - v i s u a l t a s k s b e i n g e a s i e s t . B l a n k and B r i d g e r (1966) attempted t o s e p a r a t e the r o l e of language from c o g n i t i v e development  i n t r a n s f e r of c r o s s - m o d a l l e a r n i n g , u s i n g the  deaf t o c o n t r o l f o r language.  They c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e deaf performed as  w e l l as the h e a r i n g because they had number concepts which c o u l d be e x p r e s s e d k i n a e s t h e t i c a l l y i f n o t i n language. c o n t r o l f o r language, Belmont, B i r c h and Belmont p a t i e n t s w i t h and w i t h o u t language a p h a s i a . v i e w t h a t CMM was dependent  I n a f u r t h e r attempt to (1968) used b r a i n damaged  They found no s u p p o r t f o r the  on v e r b a l m e d i a t i o n , s u p p o r t i n g the B l a n k and  24  Bridger conclusion that language may be a hindrance types of sensory  to processing some  information.  Kahn and Birch (1968) proposed that factors such as v i s u a l or auditory discrimination, auditory memory or verbal labels f o r stimuli could be possible mediators between AVI and reading.  They employed a post-hoc  questionnaire on the strategy used by the grade two to grade s i x subjects in an extended item AVI test.  They employed the following categories  (with percentage of use i n subjects' responses i n parentheses): (1) counting variations (48%) (a) counting with pauses (b) grouping (c) grouping with a word for pauses (2) attempts to v i s u a l i z e the pattern before comparison (15%) (3) i n s t i n c t i v e gestalt-proprioceptive f e e l i n g (5%) (4) no known technique  (32%).  A b i l i t y to apply labels did not influence AVI i n a p o s i t i v e way.  The use  of counting procedures showed lowest AVI scores while attempted v i s u a l i z a t i o n tended to produce high AVI scores.  Having no apparent method produced  comparable results to use of verbalized methods. This finding that v i s u a l i z e d schematization of temporal patterns mediates matching better than any other method, while s u r p r i s i n g , i s consistent with discussion a r i s i n g out of the confusion of s p a t i a l and temporal elements and dealt with by Rudnick et a l . (1972) and S t e r r i t et a l . (1971).  These studies concluded  that auditory-visual and temporal-  s p a t i a l integrations were not higher order a b i l i t i e s .  Children who  v i s u a l i z e d auditory patterns had a ready schema for comparison i n the s p a t i a l modality aspect of matching and thus had v i r t u a l l y made the match before the presentation of the VS s t i m u l i . a numerical coding system.  This was not so for those who used  Numerical coding was found to be increasingly  used i n r e l a t i o n to length of stimulus patterns and i n t e r v a l s within  25  p a t t e r n s , w i t h i n c r e a s i n g age (Lehman & Goodnow, 1972). a l s o r e f l e c t e d by changes i n i n f o r m a t i o n  Age changes were  selected f o r coding.  The  s i m p l i f i c a t i o n o f c o d i n g f o r memory purposes was e s p e c i a l l y u s e f u l i n temporal sequences.  T h i s seems t o t i e i n w i t h t h e p r o c e s s v i s u a l i z a t i o n  and  a s i m p l i f i c a t i o n i n the coding-mediation requirements.  has  s i g n i f i c a n t i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e v i s u a l - a u d i t o r y and  integrations involved i n e a r l y reading tasks.  This  notion  temporal-spatial  I n the words o f Bannatyne  (1968): In l e a r n i n g t o r e a d , c h i l d r e n l e a r n to a s s o c i a t e s o u n d - l a b e l s w i t h v i s u a l - l a b e l s (and v i c e v e r s a ) on b o t h a g e s t a l t whole-word b a s i s and on a phonemegrapheme a n a l y t i c - s y n t h e t i c b a s i s ,  (p.14)  I t may be t h a t v i s u a l i z a t i o n and v e r b a l i z a t i o n a r e b e s t used s e l e c t i v e l y and  i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y as t h e i n t e g r a t i o n t a s k changes i n terms o f t h e m o d a l i t y  of p r e s e n t a t i o n  of the i n i t i a l stimulus  s t i m u l i , as F r i e d e s The  and the c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e  (1974) s u g g e s t s .  f a c t o r of meaningfulness of the stimulus  be o f i n f l u e n c e .  m a t e r i a l might p o s s i b l y  Groenendaal and Bakker (1971) i n v e s t i g a t e d the r o l e of  m e d i a t i o n i n r e t e n t i o n o f temporal sequence and found t h a t good v e r b a l mediators perceived  and r e t a i n e d  b e t t e r than non-mediators w i t h figures.  t e m p o r a l sequences of m e a n i n g f u l f i g u r e s  t h e groups b e i n g e q u a l f o r m e a n i n g l e s s  The same d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n a p p l i e d t o good and poor r e a d e r s  (Bakker, 1967), w i t h good r e a d e r s a b l e t o r e t a i n m e a n i n g f u l f i g u r e sequences better.  Results  l e d to t h e c o n c l u s i o n  t h a t such d a t a on m e d i a t i o n and  r e t e n t i o n a p p l y t o t h e m e c h a n i c a l r e a d i n g p r o c e s s a t e a r l i e r s t a g e s of reading.  I f meaningfulness of m a t e r i a l aids i n perception  of temporal  o r d e r t h i s s u p p o r t s t h e i d e a of m e d i a t i o n f o r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n o f t e m p o r a l  26  order matching.  The s i m p l i c i t y of symmetrical  temporal patterns may  account for easier matching (Rubinstein Si Gruenberg, 1971).  Thus f o r poor  readers, adequate language does not help them i n modality matching, when a d i f f i c u l t y i n handling temporally and sequentially ordered information i s the main d i f f i c u l t y f o r such readers (Bryden, 1972; Doehring, 1968; Leong, 1976, Note 1) .  Memory i n Modality Matching A number of references have been made to the place of memory.  Birch  and Belmont's o r i g i n a l study found that children with low and high AVI scores were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t i n memory a b i l i t y as tested by the D i g i t Span subtest of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). Ford (1967) and Kahn and Birch (1968) obtained similar results using WISC Digit Span scores.  Using the Auditory and Visual Sequential Memory  subtests of the I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s  (ITPA),  Jorgensen and Hyde (1974) found no s i g n i f i c a n t relationship to AVI for auditory memory but a tentative s i g n i f i c a n t relationship between v i s u a l sequential memory and AVI f o r grade two boys.  Goodnow (1971a) controlled  for memory effects by including checks on memory f o r the o r i g i n a l series and by providing a no-memory test, with the pattern always available.  She  found that matching d i f f i c u l t y could not be accounted for by memory weakness since children with reading problems had d i f f i c u l t i e s i n matching both when the o r i g i n a l stimulus had to be remembered and when i t remained present.  Milner and Bryant (1970) found that increasing the delay of the  matching stimulus presentation added a memory factor after< delaysoofmmoce than five seconds.  Vande Voort and Senf (1973) i n comparing AVI for normal  and retarded readers using VS-VS, VT-VT, AT-AT, and AT-VS found that only  27  VS-VS and AT-AT tasks discriminated good and poor readers.  Although they  concluded that poor memory or perceptual factors may be alternatives to account f o r reading d e f i c i t s , Vande Voort, Senf and Benton (1972) had e a r l i e r found no main effect f o r interstimulus i n t e r v a l , thus concluding that i t was not possible to ascertain whether poor memory d i f f e r e n t i a t e s retarded readers from normal readers.  The consensus of research appears  to be that given an adequate memory threshold other factors than memory are required to account f o r poor sensory integration of poor readers.  Developmental Trends and Matching D i f f i c u l t y As has already been indicated, modality matching has been researched heavily over the grades K to 6.  The early Birch and Belmont studies  indicated increasing AVI a b i l i t y with age, the growth being most rapid at younger ages.  The asymptotic effects were l a t e r shown to be c e i l i n g  effects and improvement i n AVI appears to continue at least u n t i l grade s i x . Limitations of test instruments make data on the developmental trend of cross-modal matching a b i l i t y somewhat tenuous.  Both IMM and CMM appear to  follow a s i m i l a r developmental trend which i s f a i r l y well established and replicable (Goodnow, 1971a, 1971b).  The question of when and how these  a b i l i t i e s are related to reading i s less clear.  The range of studies indicate  them to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y related from K to grade s i x with the suggestion that a f t e r grade four the significance changes.  This change may be related  to the mastery of perceptual and mechanical aspects of reading from about grade four onwards f o r normal readers and to the r e l a t i v e maturation of v i s u a l and auditory perceptual a b i l i t i e s by this stage. On the matter of the r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y of IMM and CMM  tasks, the  expectation has been that cross-modal integration by i t s essential nature  28  would be more d i f f i c u l t .  Some s t u d i e s have shown t h i s t o be t r u e (Goodnow,  1971b) w h i l e some have found the r e v e r s e difficulty  ( S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971).  add t h a t IMM and CMM  (Muehl & Kremenak, 1966)  equal  Kuhlman and Wolking (1972) would  a r e not s i g n i f i c a n t l y  w i t h the same m o d a l i t y .  or  d i f f e r e n t o n l y when b o t h b e g i n  Some degree of c o n f u s i o n of f i n d i n g s can  be  a t t r i b u t e d to v a r i a t i o n s o f methodology, i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n and r e s e a r c h In s p i t e of these i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s t h e r e a r e some g e n e r a l t r e n d s t h a t be d i s t i n g u i s h e d .  The  Rudnick et a l . (1972) and  design. can  S t e r r i t t e t a l . (1971)  s t u d i e s and Jarman (1977b) concur w i t h the Muehl and Kremenak (1966) f i n d i n g s a t a g r e a t e r degree of d e t a i l . be e a s i e s t , A-V Rudnick and  and V-A  i n t e r m e d i a t e and A-A  hardest  matching was  VT-A,  VT-VT, and A-A  e a s i e s t , mixed temporal and  pure t e m p o r a l m a t c h i n g was  hardest.  to  in difficulty.  S t e r r i t t s t u d i e s found VS-VS e a s i e s t , VS-A,  •v VT-VS i n t e r m e d i a t e and A-VT, spatial  Muehl and Kremenak found V-V  A-VS,  VS-VT,  most d i f f i c u l t . spatial  The  Thus pure  intermediate  and  I n c r e a s i n g s t i m u l u s l e n g t h made a l l  t e s t s i n v o l v i n g a u d i t i o n more d i f f i c u l t . On  the m a t t e r of r e l a t i v e  t a s k d i f f i c u l t y Bryden (1972) has  some  s t r o n g c o n c l u s i o n s though d a t a were c o l l a p s e d a c r o s s sexes, and he employed a mixed c o n d i t i o n p r e s e n t a t i o n format f o r the matching t a s k s r a t h e r than blocks of s i m i l a r standard  to comparison matches.  f i r s t pattern i s a spatial  one  i s a t e m p o r a l one  (A or VT)  He found t h a t i f the  (VS) the t a s k i s easy.  the matching i s harder.  I f the f i r s t The  task  same t r e n d a p p l i e d  to the comparison c o n d i t i o n s w i t h the p r o v i s o t h a t VS p a t t e r n s a r e e a s i e r to remember and  thus t o compare.  modal matches a r e h a r d e r  In answering the q u e s t i o n whether c r o s s -  than i n t r a m o d a l matches, o r whether t e m p o r a l  p r e s e n t a t i o n makes t h e d i f f e r e n c e , Bryden concluded  t h a t c r o s s - m o d a l matches  a r e more d i f f i c u l t , s h i f t s o f t i m i n g more d i f f i c u l t than s h i f t s m o d a l i t y and  across  t h a t adding a c r o s s - m o d a l s h i f t to a temporal s h i f t does not  29  a u t o m a t i c a l l y make the matching t a s k more d i f f i c u l t .  Sex and  SES  Effects  In c o l l a p s i n g data across sex d i f f e r e n c e s . ability  (1966), Rae  the q u e s t i o n  There a r e u n q u e s t i o n a b l e sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n  (Dwyer, 1973;  i s not so c l e a r .  s e x e s , Bryden r e - i n t r o d u c e d  F o r d , 1967).  The  p o s i t i o n with regard  reading to AVI  A l t h o u g h J o r g e n s e n and Hyde (1974), Muehl and  (1977), R e i l l y  (1971) and Sharan and C a l f e e  of  however  Kremenak  (1977) found no  sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n AVI a b i l i t y , R e i l l y and J o r g e n s e n and Hyde d i d f i n d sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p of AVI  to r e a d i n g .  None of the  five  s t u d i e s mentioned, however, used more than f o u r of the n i n e p o s s i b l e matching c o m b i n a t i o n s , and  two  of the s t u d i e s used the B i r c h and  method of tapped (and t h u s , seen) a u d i t o r y p a t t e r n s . and  Bryden (1972) used a l l n i n e c o m b i n a t i o n s and  found no sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n AVI a b i l i t y . s t u d i e s had  c e i l i n g e f f e c t s w h i c h may  Belmont  Only Jarman ( i n p r e s s )  both of these s t u d i e s  S e v e r a l of the p r e v i o u s l y mentioned  have masked sex d i f f e r e n c e s .  s t u d i e s t h e r e were a l s o d i f f e r e n c e s i n age, tests.  modality  r a c e and  the c o n t e n t o f  I n these the  Three of the f i v e s t u d i e s used s u b j e c t s from d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l c l a s s  groupings. A l t h o u g h not i n c l u d e d i n C h a l f a n t SES  and  S c h e f f e l i n ' s t a b l e of v a r i a b l e s ,  appears to be a s i g n i f i c a n t independent v a r i a b l e to c o n s i d e r  modality matching s t u d i e s .  J o r g e n s e n and Hyde (1974) c o n c l u d e d t h a t  d i d make a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n to AVI performance of c h i l d r e n and s h o u l d be Sharan and C a l f e e  in  considered  when i n t e r p r e t i n g AVI  (1977) w i t h second, t h i r d and  c h i l d r e n found s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between AVI  SES  lower-class  research.  f o u r t h grade I s r a e l i a b i l i t y and  SES.  Lower  30  class and younger children found non-verbal stimuli more d i f f i c u l t to match than middle class and older children.  Since SES i s w e l l known to  have s i g n i f i c a n t relationship to measured i n t e l l i g e n c e , i t appears to be an important factor i n reading and AVI research.  Intelligence and Modality Matching Although measured i n t e l l i g e n c e played an important part i n the findings of Birch and Belmont's o r i g i n a l study (1964), and has been included as a variable i n most l a t e r studies, i t s effects have not always been controlledfor i n r e l a t i n g modality matching to reading.  Birch and Belmont (1964)  found that children with low AVI scores had lower mean I.Q.'s regardless of whether they were good or poor readers. for low and high AVI groups was  The difference*- i n mean I.Q.  s i g n i f i c a n t f o r both good and poor readers.  Poor readers with high AVI scores had similar I.Q.'s to normal readers with low AVI scores.  AVI was shown to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y related to reading  over and above shared i n t e l l i g e n c e . With methodological improvements, l a t e r studies found correlations of I.Q. with AVI ranging from .34 (Ford, 1967) 1966).  to .53 ( S t e r r i t t and Rudnick,  Later studies of course included more cross-modal and intramodal  combinations  for correlation with i n t e l l i g e n c e .  The Ford (1967) and Kahn  and Birch (1968) studies with i n t e l l i g e n c e controlled produced findings.  opposing  Ford found no AVI differences for good and poor readers while  Kahn and Birch found AVI and word knowledge (and comprehension at some grades) to be s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y related. Jarman (1977b, 1978) found that A-VS  matching discriminated most strongly among three i n t e l l i g e n c e groups  at four grade l e v e l s , compared to VS-VS, A-A, perceptual and memory tests.  VS-A°and a group of other  Factor analyses showed c l e a r l y different  31  strategies on modality matching tasks for the three I.Q. groups. Jorgensen and Hyde (1974) using c o r r e l a t i o n a l techniques found no s i g n i f i c a n t correlations between i n t e l l i g e n c e and AVI but results were probably confounded by SES.factors.  After p a r t i a l i n g f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e ,  AVI and vocabulary retained a s i g n i f i c a n t relationship.  Rae  (1977) found  that intersensory integration correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with both nonverbal I.Q. and reading achievement (.68  and .56 respectively).  With i n t e l l i g e n c e  controlled, AVI remained s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with reading but  accounted  for on^y 4 percent of reading variance. From these tests i t i s clear that the relationship of modality matching to reading and i n t e l l i g e n c e i s complicated and differences i n findings may  result from design variations and test differences. I t i s clear from  the Jarman studies that more q u a l i t a t i v e analysis of cognitive and i n t e l l e c t i v e strategies i n modality matching tasks i s necessary, together with the f u l l range of modality matching combinations,  and the  combination  of these refinements to be applied to performance of good and poor readers.  Summary and  Conclusions  It i s the view of Robinson (1976) that too few studies use continuing study of a topic and that problems i n reading w i l l never be solved by "one shot" studies (p. 14).  Among the advantages of continuing to  investigate the same topic are the opportunity to v e r i f y , to extend, to improve on weaknesses and avoid p i t f a l l s , and to include use of  new  techniques for investigation. The position i s taken by this study that"further research i s essential for understanding,  preventing and remediating d i f f i c u l t i e s i n reading  32  experienced by so many children, especially boys, beginning i n the early grades.  Reading a b i l i t y underlies success i n most areas of study and  vocation, with major implications i n the communication of knowledge and as a l e i s u r e pastime.  Understanding  of the reading process i s of central  importance for teaching methods, diagnosis of d i f f i c u l t y and f o r i n t e r vention i n cases of inadequate  performance.  The position i s taken that the early stages of learning to read are heavily dependent on perceptual aspects of the stimulus materials and organization of the information received from v i s u a l and auditory modalities Early reading i s seen as involving integration of v i s u a l , s p a t i a l , auditory and temporal information and involving a matching of v i s u a l and sound labels for both whole word and part word stimulus elements.  The sensory and i n t e r -  sensory integration approach to the study of reading, by observing the cross modal and intramodal matching a b i l i t i e s of good and poor readers i s consider to be a v a l i d and necessary area for research (Jones, 1970; 1974).  A l l evidence suggests  Jorgensen & Hyde  that there i s a continuing need for early  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of children d e f i c i e n t i n a b i l i t y to integrate auditory and v i s u a l information (Muehl & Kremenak, 1966).  Since A-VS  integration tests  appear useful i n both predicting reading d i f f i c u l t y and discriminating normal and poor readers, even with i n t e l l i g e n c e controlled, further research would seem to be productive (Beery, 1967). Lack of standardized instruments and v a r i a t i o n s i n methodology, sample selection and research f o c i have led to c o n f l i c t i n g findings i n modality research related to reading (Silverston & Deichmann, 1975).  Ceiling  effects produced by too few and too easy items i n matching tasks have contributed to equivocal findings and reduced confidence i n conclusions of  33  those studies.  At the same time, r e l i a b i l i t y of sensory integration  measures based on as few as six or ten items has been inadequate.  Confound-  ing of the s p a t i a l and temporal aspects of v i s u a l s t i m u l i i n matching tasks has further contributed to confused findings. recent studies have a l l combinations  Only i n some of the more  of intramodal and cross-modal matching  been included and i n some of these other limitations were not removed. Some of these include small samples, mixed sex groups, inadequately counterbalanced or confused orders of presentation of stimuli, and non assignment of a l l subjects to a l l conditions.  Bryden (1972) i n the only  major Canadian study to examine modality matching and reading by including a l l nine conditions of stimulus presentation did not avoid a number of these l a t t e r weaknesses.  In p a r t i c u l a r , i n t e r a c t i o n effects need to be more  adequately investigated for the temporal, s p a t i a l , v i s u a l and auditory elements of the standard and comparison conditions.  The method of stimulus  presentation i n the Bryden study appears to have confused this aspect of modality matching. Although the broad factors of i n t e l l i g e n c e and auditory-visual integration are c l e a r l y related to reading a b i l i t y , more detailed and q u a l i t a t i v e analyses of i n t e l l e c t i v e strategies and interaction effects of auditory, temporal, v i s u a l and s p a t i a l stimulus orderings as they r e l a t e to reading a b i l i t y i s considered to be necessary. There have been claims that the human being is primarily a v i s u a l animal just as some theories equate human information processing with verbal thinking. views.  These are one-sided  Human beings are both v i s u a l and  auditory, s p a t i a l and temporal,  integrating  34  and d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g .  I t follows that research  designs should include s p e c i f i c a t i o n or control of the information to be processed, the adeptness of the input modality f o r dealing with the information, and the modality response biases of the i n d i v i d u a l .  (Freides, 1974, p. 303)  This study investigates the auditory and v i s u a l , intramodal  and cross-  modal integration a b i l i t i e s of above average and below average readers, taking into account a number of the requirements and weaknesses expressed i n this review of the l i t e r a t u r e .  35  CHAPTER I I I PROBLEM the the  p r o c e s s o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n , and t h e r e f o r e  growth o f knowledge, n e v e r ends. L. J . Cronbach (p. 503)  Statement o f t h e Problem From t h e f o r e g o i n g r e v i e w i t was c o n s i d e r e d n e c e s s a r y t o f u r t h e r s t u d y the  r e l a t i o n s h i p of v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l i n t e g r a t i o n t o  reading.  A u s e f u l method o f d o i n g t h i s i s t o compare t h e s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f above average and below average r e a d e r s .  Sensory  i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s c o u l d thus be e x p r e s s e d i n terms o f a b i l i t y a t s p a t i a l and temporal, c r o s s - m o d a l and i n t r a m o d a l , matching t a s k s .  The  problem c e n t e r s around t h r e e fundamental q u e s t i o n s w h i c h a r i s e from t h e reviewed l i t e r a t u r e . 1. A r e above average and below average r e a d e r s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by d i f f e r i n g l e v e l s o f performance on t a s k s r e q u i r i n g the  i n t e g r a t i o n o f c r o s s - m o d a l , i n t r a m o d a l , s p a t i a l and  temporal information? 2. F o r above average and below average r e a d e r s , what a r e t h e r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s o f sensory i n t e g r a t i o n s i n terms o f a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l elements and t h e i r o r d e r of p r e s e n t a t i o n ? 3. A r e above average and below average r e a d e r s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by d i f f e r i n g c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s i n t h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f c r o s s - m o d a l , i n t r a m o d a l , s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l i n f o r m a t i o n ?  36  Rationale  The  rationale  of  good and  is  that reading  process  of  poor r e a d e r s  of l i f e .  causes  of  foundations  and  consideration foundational  in & of  C a l f e e , 1977;  matching  simply  as  the nature of  spatial,  of  of  (Bryden,  Rae,  1977;  sensory  but  modality and  and  sensory  as  situations called  have begun  tasks  the  integrations,  content  of  i n modality process be  may  the  be  differing  task.  The  the not  adeptness  as  required  Using  combinations viewed as  viewed  or  performance  t a s k demands. eg.  some  involved i n  cognitive strategies  and  Sharan  t o draw o u t  i n f o r m a t i o n can  integration  of  early  Jarman, 1972;  i n t h e ways c h i l d r e n  f o r the o b s e r v a t i o n of  f o r by  & Sterritt,  integrations  temporal as  the  second  1975;  dynamics which a r e  temporal  diagnosis  intrinsically  F r e i d e s , 1974,  characteristics  temporal  t o be  The  processes  read.  1975)  differences  effective  appears  the  research into  the  the  prevention,  important.  Rudnick, M a r t i n  more p o s s i b l y  stimulus  a u d i t o r y and  knowledge of  continued  1972;  first  and  involved i n establishing  to  & Deichmann,  The  i n f l u e n c e a l l walks  incomplete  learning  abilities  f o r anyone i n v o l v e d i n  is vitally  approach the v a r i o u s elements  experimental strategy  the  that  integration  auditory, spatial  the most  integration  main c o n s i d e r a t i o n s .  concern  from  reading  Qualitative  abilities  applying  kind  arise  auditory, spatial  same, v i s u a l ,  two  difficulties  of  studies  Silverston  tasks.  of  disabilities,  the p r o c e s s  of  out  sensory  f o r more a d e q u a t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g ,  processes  the i n t r i c a c i e s and  the  of r e a d i n g  more r e c e n t  the  ramifications  i s that sensory to  of  i s of major  disability  p r e s s , 1 9 7 7 b , 1978;  visual  in  Many o f  In o r d e r  remediation  The  disability  reading  reading.  and  arises  education, with  stages  of  f o r examination  of  this visual,  controlled  expertise  and  recent studies  by  37  have begun  to approach  theoretical review  bases  modality matching  which carry with  i n t h e f o r e g o i n g , and c a r r y i n g  the q u e s t i o n o f t h e confounding question  integration necessary  visual,  spatial  and  i n order  That  such  controls,  functioning desirable  (Freides,  When r e l i a b i l i t y  were used  were i n c l u d e d i n each Although  several  ability  & Pope,  decided  was d e c r e a s e d  the  third  grade  sensory  integra-  processes  plus  shown i n t h e r e v i e w e d t h e number o f i t e m s , 1967; Kahn & intramodal  to s i x but s p a t i a l  ( M u e h l & Kremenak,  1966).  performance  and  temporal  When a l l n i n e  t o r e a d i n g and few items  Martin & S t e r r i t t ,  there a r e w e l l  Engin  i n matching  to study  o f A-VS was u s e d  (Rudnick,  I t i s also  1972).  i n development o f  (Bryden,  1 9 7 2 ; R a e , 1977;  recognized sex differences  i n reading  1 9 6 3 ; Dwyer, 1 9 7 3 ; J o h n s o n , 1 9 7 3 ; N o r f l e e t , 1 9 7 3 ;  Wallbrown, Wallbrown, differences  (Beery,  s t u d i e s r e p o r t no s e x d i f f e r e n c e s  1972),  (Bentzen,  by i n c r e a s i n g  t h e s t u d y was n o t r e l a t e d task  cross-  of auditory,  has been  t a s k s were used  p e r c e p t u a l m o d a l i t i e s and matching Snyder  to assess  T o do s o w i t h a p r i o r i s u b  consistently  When t h e c o m p l e m e n t  and the  1974).  was i m p r o v e d  of matching  were c o n f o u n d e d  combinations  essential  combinations  of the subjects.  t h e number o f i t e m s  dimensions  dimensions  intramodal and cross-modal  s t e p s were n o t t a k e n  1968).  research design i s  and temporal  It i s clearly  to include a l l possible  a l l combinations  Birch,  into  t o make a d e q u a t e o b s e r v a t i o n s o f t h e c o g n i t i v e  i s also  literature. not  f o r methodological  the b a s e l i n e of intramodal f u n c t i o n i n g .  and temporal,  intellectual  groupings  from  over  of spatial  of intramodal adeptness.  clearly  tions  them, i m p l i c a t i o n s  these kinds o f  or modification.  Inherent  modal  r e s e a r c h from  & Blaha,  1975).  s t u d i e s which  Because of m e t h o d o l o g i c a l  r e p o r t no s e x d i f f e r e n c e s ,  t h e r e a d i n g and m o d a l i t y matching level.  Third  grade  i t was  of boys and g i r l s a t  s u b j e c t s were chosen  f o r three main  38  reasons.  (1) S e v e r a l o f the s t u d i e s w i t h m e t h o d o l o g i c a l  s t u d i e d c h i l d r e n of t h i s age,  inadequacies  (2) i t seems l i k e l y t h a t by t h e end o f grade  t h r e e , p e r c e p t u a l a s p e c t s o f r e a d i n g s t a r t to g i v e p l a c e to more compreh e n s i o n - c e n t e r e d r e a d i n g f o r meaning (Bond & T i n k e r , 1973), and  (3) t h e r e  i s e v i d e n c e t o suggest t h a t o p t i m a l p e r c e p t u a l development o c c u r s by age o f e i g h t y e a r s Thus as was  the  ( B u k t e n i c a , 1970).  i n d i c a t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e r e v i e w , v a r i a t i o n s i n i n s t r u m e n -  t a t i o n , i n c o n t r o l of s t i m u l u s p r e s e n t a t i o n , i n s u b j e c t v a r i a b l e s age, sample s i z e , I.Q.  (sex,  ranges e t c . ) , i n r e s e a r c h d e s i g n and f o c i , have l e f t  doubts as t o the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y r a t i o n a l e t h a t t h i s study was  o f the f i n d i n g s .  I t was w i t h t h i s  undertaken.  Hypotheses From the l i t e r a t u r e r e v i e w and the t h r e e fundamental  questions  i n t r o d u c e d the r a t i o n a l e f o r the s t u d y , t h e f o l l o w i n g hypotheses  which  presented  themselves. Question 1 Are above a v e r a g e and below average r e a d e r s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by l e v e l s o f performance on t a s k s r e q u i r i n g the i n t e g r a t i o n of  differing  cross-modal,  i n t r a m o d a l , s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l i n f o r m a t i o n ? Hypothesis  1  Above average r e a d e r s w i l l be s i g n i f i c a n t l y s u p e r i o r t o below average r e a d e r s i n performance on s p a t i a l , t e m p o r a l , a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l  matching  tasks. Question 2 For above average and below average r e a d e r s , what are the  relative  39  d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s of sensory integrations in terms of auditory and v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and temporal elements and their order of presentation? Hypothesis  2.1  There w i l l be s i g n i f i c a n t differences i n r e l a t i v e task d i f f i c u l t y among the matching tasks within reading a b i l i t y l e v e l s . Hypothesis  2.2  There w i l l be s i g n i f i c a n t interaction e f f e c t s involving reading l e v e l and the v i s u a l , auditory, s p a t i a l and temporal elements f o r d i f f e r e n t orders of presentation i n the standard and comparison positions. Question 3 Are above average and below average readers characterized by d i f f e r i n g cognitive processes in the integration of s p a t i a l , temporal,  cross-modal  and intramodal information? Hypothesis 3 Different cognitive processing w i l l be found for above average and below average readers as inferred from d i f f e r e n t factor loadings in exploratory factor analyses of performance scores on the matching tasks.  40  CHAPTER IV METHOD  Subjects The population from which the four groups of readers were selected comprised  some 550 boys and g i r l s i n 24 grade three classes, from eight  schools.  These schools were located i n the compact North Delta area of  the Delta School D i s t r i c t , set  B.C. The community i n which the schools are  i s considered to be of f a i r l y homogeneous middle-class  socio-economic  status. A l l 24 grade three classes were tested for reading a b i l i t y  (Gates-  MacGinitie Reading Tests; Gates & MacGinitie, 1965) and i n t e l l i g e n c e (Lorge-Thorndike Non-verbal battery; Lorge, Thorndike & Hagen, 1967), as the bases for group s e l e c t i o n . l o g i c a l or emotional d i s a b i l i t i e s  Children with known learning, neuroor with uncorrected hearing or v i s i o n  d i f f i c u l t i e s were then excluded, together with those for whom English was a second language.  About 25 children were thus excluded.  The reading  tests were administered at the mid grade three (3.5) stage of the year. Grade placement scores ranged from 1.4 to 7.1 with a mean of 4.82.  Equal  numbers of boys and g i r l s from the lowest and highest reading a b i l i t y levels were then selected, who could be matched for i n t e l l i g e n c e , and which would give the largest groupings of above average and below average readers with regard to the grade three population tested. boys selected were excluded due to f a i l u r e  Seven of the  to obtain parental permission  to take part i n the study. The f i n a l sample thus consisted of two groups of 36 boys and two groups  41  of 36 g i r l s , matched for i n t e l l i g e n c e and representing above average and below average readers for t h i s sub-population (see Table 2).  Table 2 Characteristics of Reading Groups Below Average Readers Boys X Age (mos)  Girls  SD  X  Above Average Readers Boys  SD  105.97  5. 74  104. 78  5 .49  Non-verbal I.Q.. 94.22  9.77  94. 08  9 .63  X 104. 23  Girls SD 3.30  X  SD  104. 71  3.86  94. 00 10.21  94. 89  8.21  Reading (raw scores) Vocabulary  31.64  5. 37  29. 03  6 .62  45. 72  2.36  45. 44  2.61  Comprehension  22.75  6.85  24. 06  7.07  42. 47  3.28  40. 94  3.31  Reading Total  54.39  9.62  53. 08 12 .46  88. 19  4.66  86. 36  4.99  3.18  •54  5. 92  .57  5. 72  .56  Grade Level  3. 17  .67  The standardized reading test appeared to give i n f l a t e d scores such that the mean reading grade l e v e l was 4.82.  Thus some 33 percent of boys and 25 percent  of g i r l s c l a s s i f i e d as below average readers scored above their actual grade placement l e v e l .  The mean grade l e v e l scores of the-below average (boys 3.18,  g i r l s 3.17) and above average readers (boys 5.92, g i r l s 5.72) were thus 1.6 and 1.0 grades respectively below and above the sub-population mean of 4.82. Within the below average readers (hereafter referred to as low), the grade scores ranged from 1.7 to 4.2, while for the above average readers (referred to as high) the range was from 4.8 to 7.1.  42  I n s t r u m e n t s and  Test instruments  Scoring Procedures  used, f a l l i n t o two c a t e g o r i e s - those used i n s e l e c t i o n  o f s u b j e c t s and w h i c h gave the i n t e l l i g e n c e and r e a d i n g measures, and  those  used w i t h the f o u r groups thus s e l e c t e d , namely the m o d a l i t y matching t e s t s o f sensory i n t e g r a t i o n . S e l e c t i o n Instruments Gates M a c G i n i t i e  Reading T e s t s , L e v e l C, Form 2.  T h i s t e s t has been the most commonly used r e a d i n g measure i n p a s t m o d a l i t y matching s t u d i e s .  I n a d d i t i o n i t was  about t o become p a r t o f  the r e g u l a r t e s t i n g program of the D e l t a S c h o o l D i s t r i c t . has some l i m i t a t i o n s (Buros, 1972;  W h i l e the  test  F a r r & A n a s t a s i o w , 1971), the t e c h n i c a l  manual r e p o r t s the f o l l o w i n g r e l i a b i l i t i e s  (Gates & M a c G i n i t i e ,  1972)  Table 3 Reliability Reliability study 1964-65  1971-72  Reading measure  Data  A l t e r n a t e form reliability  Split half reliability  Vocabulary  .85  .89  Comprehension  .87  .91  Vocabulary  .88  .90  Comprehension  .85  .91  V a l i d i t y i n f o r m a t i o n i s l i m i t e d to one d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n s t u d y i n 1968  which found c o n c u r r e n t v a l i d i t y w i t h f o u r o t h e r s t a n d a r d i z e d  t e s t s to g i v e median c o e f f i c i e n t s of comprehension.  Form 2 of L e v e l C was  .84 f o r v o c a b u l a r y  and  .79 f o r  s e l e c t e d i n v i e w o f the  possibility  t h a t Form 1 had a l r e a d y been a d m i n i s t e r e d a t the b e g i n n i n g o f the year.  reading  school  43  Canadian L o r g e - T h o r n d i k e I n t e l l i g e n c e Test Although  (non-verbal b a t t e r y ) .  t h e L o r g e - T h o r n d i k e I n t e l l i g e n c e T e s t was  f r e q u e n t l y used i n  e a r l i e r s t u d i e s , o n l y one of the p u b l i s h e d s t u d i e s used t h e Canadian version.  In a survey of i n t e l l e c t i v e t e s t s used i n e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l s i n  A l b e r t a , Ogston (1973) conducted a r e v i e w of a s s o c i a t e d r e s e a r c h on e m p i r i c a l l y determined r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y e s t i m a t e s . L o r g e - T h o r n d i k e was  The  the L o r g e - T h o r n d i k e has been s u b j e c t e d to  most complete e v a l u a t i o n of r e l i a b i l i t y w i t h o n l y a s t a b i l i t y not r e p o r t e d " (p. 274). to .94  (Spearman-Brown) and  r e l i a b i l i t y f o r the n o n - v e r b a l  to 4.8  the  estimate  .87  to .91  (Kuder-Richardson).  b a t t e r y of L e v e l A as  points.  The  r e p o r t s odd-even .93, a K-R  20  of .93 and a standard e r r o r of measurement r a n g i n g from  d e v i a t i o n I.Q.  level.  R e l i a b i l i t y e s t i m a t e s were .76 to .90 f o r e q u i v a l e n t  T e c h n i c a l Supplement (Lorge, T h o r n d i k e & Hagen, 1972)  reliability  Canadian  the most f r e q u e n t l y used t e s t a t the grade t h r e e  Ogston w r i t e s t h a t "...  forms, .88  literature  3.6  In a study conducted by t h e G r e a t e r  Victoria  School Board, the s t a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t over one y e a r , f o u r months was at the grade t h r e e  .64  level.  V a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s a r e r e p o r t e d w i t h Canadian Test of B a s i c a t grade 6 f o r v o c a b u l a r y  (.56), r e a d i n g  (.62)  and  Skills  composite (.71).  on an Edmonton study a t grade t h r e e gave c o r r e l a t i o n s of .50 w i t h  Data  reading.  C o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h O t i s and Henmon-Nelson group i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s were .48 and  .61  grade s i x was  ( O t i s ) and  .69.  The  c o r r e l a t i o n with Stanford-Binet  .78 and w i t h WISC F u l l S c a l e , .53.  s t a t e s t h a t the n o n - v e r b a l  at  The T e c h n i c a l Supplement  b a t t e r y p e r m i t s assessment o f "...  abstract  i n t e l l i g e n c e w h i c h i s not i n f l u e n c e d by s p e c i f i c d i s a b i l i t y i n r e a d i n g " (p. 4 ) .  44  Modality Matching Tests The instruments f o r the modality matching tasks comprised three elements.  V i s u a l s p a t i a l (VS) s t i m u l i were presented as dot patterns on  35 mm s l i d e transparencies, the projector being controlled by inaudible impulses on one track of the i n s t r u c t i o n cassette tape.  Auditory temporal  (AT) s t i m u l i were presented on the verbal i n s t r u c t i o n track of the tapes. These auditory s t i m u l i were also used to cue and control the presentation of the v i s u a l temporal stimuli (VT) which were flashing l i g h t patterns. For each of these three elements there were two sets of stimulus patterns, one f o r presentation i n the i n i t i a l or standard p o s i t i o n and one f o r presentation i n the f i n a l or comparison position.  The three  elements were combined i n nine pairs of presentations with each element appearing  three times as the standard stimulus and three times as the  comparison stimulus: AT-AT  VT-AT  VS-AT  AT-VT  VT-VT  VS-VT  AT-VS  VT-VS  VS-VS  Visual spatial stimuli.  Stimulus patterns (Jarman, 1977a, 1978)  consisted of from three to seven dots arranged i n varying sized groups with short and long gaps.  If a dot i s represented as one unit i n diameter,  a short gap was .80 units and a long gap was 7.17 units. v i s u a l patterns consisted of 38 s l i d e transparencies: f i v e practice items and 30 test items.  A series of  three examples,  Two series of s l i d e s were required  (one standard and one comparison) with two copies of each series, (one for VS as standard, one f o r VS as comparison and two f o r VS-VS as both standard and comparison condition). A l l s l i d e s were tinted pale blue to avoid screen glare.  45  Standard and comparison pairs of s t i m u l i had equal numbers of dots, varying in arrangement, sometimes being the same and sometimes d i f f e r e n t . The order of same or d i f f e r e n t items was randomized to avoid memory or systematic response set effects. of eight patterns having  Pairs of items were grouped in blocks  the same number of dots.  number from four to seven over four blocks As the items increased i n complexity,  Dots increased in  (see Appendix A for diagram).  the duration of presentation  increased from one second for the easiest to three seconds for the longest. After a short t r i a l period of s l i d e presentation times ranging from two to four seconds on the o r i g i n a l tapes, i t appeared that a c e i l i n g e f f e c t was l i k e l y for the VS-VS condition. range from one to three seconds.  Times were accordingly reduced to  Since i t was not possible to re-cue  the tapes to the reduced times, the o r i g i n a l pulses were used to present the VS s t i m u l i and a card, timed by stopwatch, was used to cut o f f the projection image at the appropriate time. was  The accuracy of this procedure  found to be comparable to the o r i g i n a l cued timing.  Auditory temporal s t i m u l i .  The basis for these stimulus patterns  were groups of tone bursts or beeps recorded on cassette tapes and  identical  in array to the dot patterns for the standard and comparison conditions. Tapes o r i g i n a l l y made by Jarman (1977a) were modified for t h i s study Appendix C).  A l l beeps were .15 sec. i n duration.  .35 sec. and long pauses were 1.35 of beeps ranged from 1.15  sec.  seconds to 8.15  Short pauses were  Overall length of the patterns seconds over the three examples,  f i v e t r i a l s and 30 test items.  Visual temporal stimuli.  (see  Tone bursts or beeps from the auditory  temporal patterns became the triggering and c o n t r o l l i n g mechanism for  46  the v i s u a l temporal p a t t e r n s of f l a s h e s o f l i g h t Moore, Note 2; see Appendix  C).  (Jarman, M a r s h a l l &  The e x a c t t i m i n g and s p a c i n g o f the  a u d i t o r y beeps was thus reproduced i n the f l a s h i n g o f a s m a l l i n c a n d e s c e n t lamp. "Ready"  F i g u r e 2.  s p a t i a l standard 1.0 t o 3.0 sec. or 1.5 to 8.15 sec. temporal s t a n d a r d  "and"  s p a t i a l comparison 1.0 to 3.0 s e c . or 1.15 to 8.15 s e c . temporal comparison  Arrangement o f s p a t i a l and temporal elements  V i s u a l , s p a t i a l , a u d i t o r y and temporal combinations.  i n matching  Four  original  c a s s e t t e tapes were c o n v e r t e d by t r a n s f e r r i n g them to r e e l - t o - r e e l where 1000 Hz s y n c - p u l s e cues were added to c o n t r o l times o f the v i s u a l s p a t i a l  (slides) stimuli  r e e l tapes were then c o p i e d onto c a s s e t t e s .  tasks.  tapes,  the p r e s e n t a t i o n  (see Appendix  B). R e e l - t o -  F i v e new c o p i e s o f tapes  were made and m o d i f i e d so t h a t the tone b u r s t s o r beeps c o u l d c o n t r o l the l i g h t f l a s h e s and n o t be a u d i b l e .  Thus a l l n i n e combinations were  accounted f o r and c o n t r o l l e d by the n i n e c a s s e t t e tapes p l a y e d on a Wollensak 3M tape r e c o r d e r , m o d i f i e d to p i c k up the 500 Hz tone b u r s t s which c o n t r o l l e d the l i g h t f l a s h e s Due  (see Appendix C ) .  to the a d d i t i o n of f i v e i n t e g r a t i o n combinations, the o r i g i n a l  taped i n t r o d u c t o r y i n s t r u c t i o n s were d i s c a r d e d i n f a v o u r of manually p r e s e n t e d example and t r i a l items, working 1000  from s t a n d a r d s c r i p t s .  A  Hz s o l i d - t o n e tape w i t h breaker s w i t c h p e r m i t t e d p r e s e n t a t i o n o f  a u d i t o r y beeps.  S i m i l a r l y a manual s w i t c h c i r c u i t p e r m i t t e d the l i g h t to  be f l a s h e d manually.  When the i n t r o d u c t o r y s e c t i o n was completed the  t a p e - c o n t r o l l e d sequences i n t e g r a t i o n combinations.  f o r the 30 matching  items p r e s e n t e d the v a r i o u s  S l i d e s were p r o j e c t e d from a s t a n d a r d d i s t a n c e  47  using an auto-focus Kodak 760H carousel projector.  The flashing lamp  was placed at the bottom of the projection screen.  Scoring Procedures Raw scores were used from the Gates-MacGinitie Test since the procedure described i n the manual f o r the construction of standard appeared somewhat i r r e g u l a r . the test norms.  scores  Grade scores were calculated according to  Lorge-Thorndike scores were converted into deviation IQ  equivalents using test norms also.  Each of the matching tasks were  scored f o r the number of errors on the t h i r t y items with no correction for  guessing.  The response required from the subject a f t e r the comparison  condition was a choice of whether the two patterns were the same or different.  Immediate feedback on correctness of response was given during  the t r i a l items f o r the matching tasks but no indication as to correctness of choice was given thereafter.  Materials Two sets of s c r i p t s were drawn up f o r standardization of introductory instructions.  Nine i n the f i r s t set were used f o r the i n i t i a l presentation  i n each of the nine orders of presentation.  The second set of nine  s c r i p t s was used on subsequent matching sessions, being somewhat s i m p l i f i e d to avoid redundancy as subjects became f a m i l i a r with procedures.  Nine  response forms were constructed, one f o r each of the integration tasks, with the words  same  different  printed f o r each of the 35 items.  The subject was thus required only to c i r c l e the word f o r the chosen response. Apart from the tape recorder and sync-cued projector the only additional  48  pieces of apparatus were the electronic c i r c u i t s and cued tapes constructed at  the U.B.C. Instructional Media Centre.  Manual switching systems f o r  the i n s t r u c t i o n a l phase of each matching session were also constructed at the Instructional Media Centre.  Procedure Approval for conducting the study was obtained from the Superintendent of  the Delta School Board.  P r i n c i p a l s i n the North Delta group of schools  were n o t i f i e d by the Board o f f i c e that approval of a research study had been granted. In early February, 1978, the P r i n c i p a l s were contacted by phone to arrange interviews to explain the purpose and nature of the study.  In  those interviews, P r i n c i p a l s received a printed outline of the procedures to be followed, indicating what would be required of the school by the project.  At the same time, the teachers of the grade three classes were  given the reading test materials and administration manual, together with some guidelines i n order to make the administration of the reading tests by classroom teachers as standard as possible.  During t h i s v i s i t a  schedule was made f o r administration of the Lorge-Thorndike Test by the investigator. study.  Intelligence  Three schools chose not to take part i n the  Testing was begun i n the t h i r d week of February and completed by  the f i r s t week of A p r i l .  Scoring of a l l the reading and i n t e l l i g e n c e tests  was carried out and double checked by the investigator. Students' reading vocabulary and comprehension scores were used to establish the o v e r a l l sub-population parameters, and the two groups of above and below average readers were separated.  Approximately  36 boys and  36 g i r l s i n each category were selected and matched for IQ and age, and  49  checked by t h e t e a c h e r s a c c o r d i n g to t h e l i m i t a t i o n s s e t c o n c e r n i n g freedom from d i s a b i l i t i e s .  A l e t t e r was  s e n t home to the p a r e n t s of the c h i l d r e n  s e l e c t e d , o u t l i n i n g t h e purpose of t h e s t u d y and c o n t a i n i n g a t e a r - o f f s l i p to be r e t u r n e d to the s c h o o l , g i v i n g o r w i t h h o l d i n g p e r m i s s i o n f o r t h e i r c h i l d to t a k e p a r t i n the s t u d y .  Several schools i n v i t e d  parents  to e v e n i n g meetings to ask q u e s t i o n s about the study b e f o r e r e s p o n d i n g to the r e q u e s t l e t t e r . matching  F o l l o w i n g the p a r e n t s ' response and the IQ  p r o c e d u r e , 36 boys and 36 g i r l s from each r e a d i n g a b i l i t y  level  became the s u b j e c t s o f the s t u d y . Each c h i l d i n each group was one to n i n e which determined matching  tasks.  the o r d e r i n which  they would do each of the  E q u a l numbers from each group were a s s i g n e d to each o r d e r  of p r e s e n t a t i o n .  The n i n e o r d e r s o f p r e s e n t a t i o n were s e l e c t e d on  b a s i s of the t a b l e s of complete & Y a t e s , 1963)  then randomly a s s i g n e d a number from  the  s e t s of o r t h o g o n a l L a t i n Squares ( F i s h e r  which gave an a p p r o x i m a t e l y c o u n t e r b a l a n c e d o r d e r  (see  Figure 3).  F i g u r e 3.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  2  3  1  5  6  4  8  9  7  3  1  2  6  4  5  9  7  8  4  5  6  7  8  9  1  2  3  5  6  4  8  9  7  2  3  1  6  4  5  9  7  8  3  1  2  7  8  9  1  2  3  4  5  6  8  9  7  2  3  1  5  6  4  9  7  8  3  1  2  6  4  5  Orders of p r e s e n t a t i o n of the matching of the groups numbered one  to n i n e .  t a s k s f o r each  50  A schedule was then drawn up i n order to carry out the testing i n small groups according to location of the students and the orders of presentation.  Each matching task required approximately  20 minutes of  actual testing time with whatever administration time was required to s e t t l e the children and establish working rapport.  Testing was c a r r i e d  out i n a variety of r e l a t i v e l y undisturbed rooms with groups of one to six students.  In the f i r s t session time was taken to explain the purpose  of the study and to encourage cooperation.  In four of the f i v e testing  sessions, two matching tasks were administered consecutively, requiring 45 minutes, with a small break between tasks i n addition to the standard rest periods controlled by the tapes.  Each successive round of tests  took place every eight to ten days, thus requiring three months to completion i n early June.  The timetable of testing was arranged so that  each c h i l d was tested at a d i f f e r e n t time of the day on each of the f i v e testing occasions.  51  CHAPTER V RESULTS  When the interaction i s s i g n i f i c a n t , F r a t i o s are not very h e l p f u l in answering the questions that are raised.  What should be done?  follow Cox's (1958, p. 133) advice:  Let us  "In the  majority of cases . . . i n t e l l i g e n t ...plotting of the results i s the most important step ..." A. Lubin (p.811) Subject C l a s s i f i c a t i o n s From the summary data i n Table 2 i t can be seen that the four groups of subjects were v i r t u a l l y undifferentiable on the basis of age and non-verbal I.Q.  Similarly, the groups of boys and g i r l s f o r the t o t a l sample showed  no s i g n i f i c a n t sex differences i n mean vocabulary and comprehension scores. In comparing mean scores f o r the reading a b i l i t y sub-groups, the only s i g n i f i c a n t sex difference was f o r the high boys' higher comprehension scores (jt = 1.96, p_ <• 05).  The comparisons of matching task performance of  the various groupings of subjects were made against these bases of equivalence. The I.Q. matching process together with the l i m i t a t i o n s set on reading in subject selection had the e f f e c t of removing some of the extremes of reading and i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t y .  Thus the I.Q. scores, which ranged from  76 to 122 (mean = 94.3, S.D. = 9.39), were a l i t t l e below the figures f o r the grade three sub-population (mean = 100.25, S.D. = 15.48).  The r e l a t i o n -  ships among the reading measures, and between reading measures and I.Q. can be seen i n Table 4.  While vocabulary and comprehension were s i g n i f i c a n t l y  correlated for both sexes and f o r a l l reading groups except low boys, the  52  c o r r e l a t i o n s o f I.Q. and r e a d i n g measures i n d i c a t e d some sex and r e a d i n g ability  differences. Table 4 Correlations  o f Reading and I.Q. Measures Boys  Girls  Boys and G i r l s  Grade 3 S u b - p o p u l a t i o n Vocabulary/Comprehension  .34  Vocabulary/T .Q.  .18  Comprehension/I.Q.  .45  AAA  AA  AAA  .23 .44  AA  AAA  ,22 ,22  AA AA AA  .13  .23  N=234  N=252  N=486  Vocabulary/Comprehension  .35  .40  Vocabulary/I.Q.  .31  .63  Comprehension/I.Q.  .40  .56  Reading G r o u p s  3  H i g h Readers  iAAA iAAA  Low Readers Vocabulary/Comprehension  .23  Vocabulary/I.Q.  .10  Comprehension/I.Q.  .19  i AAA  .66 .10 .13 N = 36 A AA  p <.05 p <.01  AAA  £<.001 W h i l e I.Q. and r e a d i n g measures were g e n e r a l l y  significantly  related  f o r t h e grade t h r e e s u b - p o p u l a t i o n and f o r t h e h i g h g i r l s , none o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s was s i g n i f i c a n t  f o r e i t h e r group o f l o w r e a d e r s .  The o n l y o t h e r  53  s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n was f o r h i g h boys between I.Q. and comprehension. C o r r e l a t i o n s f o r t h e r e a d i n g groups were a f f e c t e d by r e s t r i c t i o n o f range as compared w i t h c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r t h e s u b - p o p u l a t i o n .  The r e s t r i c t i o n was  e x p l i c i t f o r t h e r e a d i n g measures s i n c e average r e a d e r s and some from t h e extremes were e x c l u d e d .  There was t h u s an i m p l i c i t r e s t r i c t i o n o f range  i n the I.Q. d a t a , augmented by e x c l u s i o n o f extremes o f i n t e l l i g e n c e i n the matching f o r I.Q. p r o c e s s .  A c c o r d i n g l y t h e r e was an i m p l i c i t  limita-  t i o n on t h e range o f t h e matching t a s k d a t a w i t h e f f e c t s which i n f l u e n c e d the  a n a l y s e s based on the m a t c h i n g t a s k d a t a .  M a t c h i n g Tasks and C l a s s i f i c a t i o n  Variables  The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e e r r o r s c o r e s f o r m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g t a s k s w i t h r e a d i n g v o c a b u l a r y and comprehension s c o r e s o f t h e f o u r r e a d i n g groups can be seen i n T a b l e s 5 and 6. Table 5 C o r r e l a t i o n s o f M o d a l i t y M a t c h i n g and Reading Measures: Tasks  Vocabulary  Comprehension  Boys  Reading T o t a l  Low  High  Low  High  Low  High  AT-AT  -.16  -.29  -.03-  -.18  -. 11  -.28  AT-VT  -.07  -.11  -.15  -.03  -.15  -.08  AT-VS  -.23  -.15  -.17  -.14  -.25  -.18  VT-AT  -.14  -.24  -.27  -.03  -.27  -.14  VT-VT  -.08  -.16  -.31  -.05  -.18  -.12  VT-VS  -.19  -.33*  -.33*  -.15  -.34*  -.27  VS-AT  -.19  -.13  -.16  -.01  -.22  -.07  VS-VT  -.23  -.34*  -.34*  -.23  -.37*  -.33*  VS-VS  -.21  -.14  -.38*  -.09  -.39*  -.14  Note.  N e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s are due to use of  *p <.05 **P <.01  error scores.  54  The VT-VS task was s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with vocabulary f o r high reading boys and with comprehension f o r low:, readers. task, VS-VT, showed the same pattern.  The converse  It i s of interest that the s p a t i a l -  temporal integration tasks within v i s i o n were s i g n i f i c a n t l y related to d i f f e r e n t aspects of reading f o r the two l e v e l s of reading a b i l i t y .  The  VS-VS task was s i g n i f i c a n t l y related to comprehension f o r low boys. 'Thus none of the tasks was s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with word recognition f o r low reading boys, and none with comprehension for high readers. Table 6 Correlations of Modality Matching and Reading Measures: Tasks  Vocabulary  Comprehension  Girls  Reading Total  Low  High  Low  High  Low  High  AT-AT  -.16  -.25  -.32*  -.21  -.26  -.28  AT-VT  -.02  -.30  -.14  -.15  -.09  -.27  AT-VS  -.31  -.13  -.48**  -.04  -.43**  -.10  VT-AT  -.22  -.25  -.20  -.19  -.23  -.26  VT-VT  -.06  -.26  -.11  -.21  -.03  -.28  VT-VS  -.09  -.27  -.28  -.29  -.21  -.33*  VS-AT  -.10  -.22  -.25  -.10  -.19  -.19  VS-VT  -.02  -.33*  -.01  -.23  -.01  -.33*  VS-VS  -.34*  -.27  -.31  -.28  -.36*  -.34*  Note.  Negative correlations are due to use of error scores.  *p_ <.05 **p_ '<• 01 Patterns of c o r r e l a t i o n f o r g i r l readers showed some s i m i l a r i t i e s and some differences when compared to the boys.  For low g i r l s , two tasks with  55  AT s t a n d a r d s hension.  (AT-AT and AT-VS) were s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h compre-  There was a tendency f o r b o t h v o c a b u l a r y  and comprehension t o  be more h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h VS-VS s c o r e s though o n l y f o r low g i r l s ' v o c a b u l a r y was t h i s s i g n i f i c a n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h t o t a l r e a d i n g s c o r e s f o r b o t h groups o f g i r l s .  VS-VT was s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h  f o r h i g h g i r l s , a s i t was f o r h i g h boys.  vocabulary  A g a i n t h e r e were no s i g n i f i c a n t  c o r r e l a t i o n s of matching t a s k s w i t h comprehension f o r h i g h r e a d e r s .  Only  the one t a s k (VS-VS) was s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h word r e c o g n i t i o n f o r low r e a d i n g g i r l s .  Again the s p a t i a l - t e m p o r a l i n t e g r a t i o n tasks w i t h i n  v i s i o n were more h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h v o c a b u l a r y f o r h i g h r e a d e r s .  It  would appear t h a t c r o s s - m o d a l and i n t r a m o d a l i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s a r e d i f f e r e n t i a l l y r e l a t e d to r e a d i n g s k i l l s f o r t h e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f reading a b i l i t y ,  t o g e t h e r w i t h some sex d i f f e r e n c e s .  A l t h o u g h no h y p o t h e s e s were f o r m u l a t e d about t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f i n t e l l i g e n c e and i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s , has been o f importance i n reviewed  the nature of t h i s  literature.  relationship  S i n c e a l l groups were  matched f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e , t h e o n l y source o f d a t a on t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f matching and i n t e l l i g e n c e was i n the c o r r e l a t i o n s between these two measures f o r t h e r e a d i n g groups (see T a b l e 7). The  o n l y c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the l o w r e a d i n g groups w i t h any n o t e w o r t h y  s i g n i f i c a n c e were f o r t h e l o w boys on t h e VT-AT and VS-VT t a s k s .  For  the h i g h r e a d e r s , s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s o c c u r r e d f o r h i g h g i r l s on AT-AT, VT-AT and VT-VS t a s k s , t h e l a t t e r b e i n g t h e o n l y t a s k w i t h a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n f o r h i g h boys.  Significant c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r high  r e a d i n g g i r l s o c c u r r e d on t h r e e t a s k s w i t h temporal w h i c h i n v o l v e d AT comparisons.  standards,  two o f  The o n l y t a s k w h i c h was c o r r e l a t e d w i t h I.Q.  f o r b o t h boy and g i r l h i g h r e a d e r s i n v o l v e d a temporal  to s p a t i a l  shift  56  w i t h i n the v i s u a l modality  (VT-VS).  F o r low boys t h e t a s k most h i g h l y  c o r r e l a t e d w i t h I.Q. i n v o l v e d a s p a t i a l t o t e m p o r a l s h i f t w i t h i n t h e v i s u a l modality  (VS-VT).  The most d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n s were t h a t i n t e l l i g e n c e and  m a t c h i n g a b i l i t i e s were p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d f o r a l l s u b j e c t s , w i t h d i f f e r e n t patterns of r e l a t i o n s h i p s o c c u r r i n g f o r the d i f f e r e n t  reading  a b i l i t y and sex groups. Table 7 C o r r e l a t i o n s of M a t c h i n g Tasks and Non - V e r b a l I.Q. Tasks  Low Readers' I.Q.  High Readers' I.Q.  Boys  Girls  All  Boys  Girls  AT-AT  -.25  -.02  -.13  -.16  -.34  -.24  AT-VT  -.28  -.12  -.20  -.04  -.26  -.13  AT-VS  -.26  -.25  -.25  -.19  -.10  -.15  VT-AT  -.34  -.08  -.23  -.07  -.34  -.15  VT-VT  -.29  -.08  -.18  -.04  -.29  -.13  VT-VS  -.21  -.06  -.14  -.34  -.41  -.37  VS-AT  -.16  -.22  -.19  -.15  -.22  -.18  VS-VT  -.41  -.15  -.28  -.23  -.25  -.24  VS-VS  -.28  -.14  -.22  -.09  -.31  -.11  Note.  Negative  *  AA  A  A  A  A  A  All A  AA  A*  A  c o r r e l a t i o n s a r e due to use o f e r r o r s c o r e s .  A  P<.05 AA  P <.01 Matching Task R e l i a b i l i t y From t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e v i e w , r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e t a s k s used f o r m o d a l i t y matching was n o t e d as f r e q u e n t l y q u e s t i o n a b l e due t o t h e s m a l l number of items used, and t o c e i l i n g e f f e c t s .  Consequently, Kuder-Richardson  formula  20 r e l i a b i l i t i e s were c a l c u l a t e d f o r the n i n e t a s k s , each c o n t a i n i n g 30  57  i t e m s f o r t h e two r e a d i n g l e v e l s .  These a r e r e p o r t e d i n T a b l e 8. Table 8  R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r Matching Task  Low Readers  Tasks  High Readers  AT-AT  .582  .653  AT-VT  .702  .717  AT-VS  .734  .682  VT-AT  .469  .710  VT-VT  .566  .690  VT-VS  .707  .688  VS-AT  .832  .669  VS-VT  .731  .690  VS-VS  .756  .711  a  K u d e r -•Richardson  3  f o r m u l a 20  The range and l e v e l o f r e l i a b i l i t y measures were moderate and s i m i l a r f o r both r e a d i n g l e v e l s , b e i n g p a r t i c u l a r l y even f o r h i g h r e a d e r s . three lowest r e l i a b i l i t i e s  f o r low r e a d e r s were on t h e p u r e l y  t a s k s w i t h the h i g h e s t e r r o r r a t e s .  W i t h a two c h o i c e response  and 100 items t h e e s t i m a t e d r e l i a b i l i t y Thus t o have o b t a i n e d r e l i a b i l i t i e s  The  temporal format  s h o u l d be about .74 ( E b e l , 1969).  a v e r a g i n g .675 and .690 f o r low and  h i g h r e a d e r s r e s p e c t i v e l y , f o r 30 i t e m t a s k s , a p p e a r s t o be a r e a s o n a b l e result.  E b e l (1969) e s t i m a t e d t h a t t o expect a r e l i a b i l i t y o f .90 on a  t w o - c h o i c e s - p e r - i t e m t e s t would r e q u i r e 270 i t e m s . reliability  Since the pooled item  f o r t h e n i n e t e s t s o f 30 items (270 items i n t o t a l ) f o r b o t h  groups was .875, t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e n i n e m a t c h i n g t a s k s was c o n s i d e r e d to be a c c e p t a b l e .  Ebel a l s o pointed out that estimates of r e l i a b i l i t y  58  are if  raised  above t h e expected  the test  i s particularly  reliabilities test, the  i f test  items  f o r 30 i t e m s w e r e c l o s e t o t h o s e  o f the items  are high  homogeneous i n c o n t e n t .  and s i n c e the content  quality  level  i n q u a l i t y and  Since  expected  the obtained  f o r a 100  item  o f t a s k s was h o m o g e n e o u s i t was a s s u m e d t h a t  was o f a n a c c e p t a b l e Table  standard.  9  Mean E r r o r s o n M a t c h i n g  Tasks  Low R e a d e r s Boys  High  Girls  Readers  Boys  Girls  Tasks  X  S.D.  X  S. D.  AT-AT  9.14  3.45  10.58  4. 02  7.83  3.93  7.64  3,65  4.61  11.00  4. 35  7.55  4.35  9.17  4.09  4. 16  6.72  3.79  7.25  3.64  AT-VT  10.25  X  S.D.  X  S.D.  AT-VS  9.97  5.08  VT-AT  11.58  4.09  12.19  3. 02  8.08  4.39  9.17  4.19  VT-VT  11.33  3.74  11.58  4. 04  7.36  3.97  9.75  3.92  9.92  VT-VS  9.89  4.85  9.72  4. 10  7.42  4.46  7.11  3.22  VS-AT  7.14  5.27  5.69  4. 66  3.14  2.84  3.08  2.66  VS-VT  5.50  3.92  6.11  4. 00  3.30  2.91  3.53  3.04  VS-VS  3.58  3.79  2.36  1. 88  1.72  1.89  2.83  2.96  Mean T a s k  Performance  Question reading matching  o n e was  ability tasks  addressed  and m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g .  by a f o u r way  reading as between-subject  analysis  variables,  as w i t h i n - s u b j e c t v a r i a b l e s .  of the r e l a t i o n s h i p  Mean e r r o r  f o r the f o u r r e a d i n g groups  s c o r e s were a n a l y z e d  stimuli  to the nature  scores  can be seen  on t h e n i n e  i n Table  of variance, with  and w i t h  standard  between  and  A s t r o n g main e f f e c t  9.  Error  sex and  comparison  was  found  59  f o r r e a d i n g , w i t h the h i g h r e a d e r s F_ (1,140) = 28.49, p_<.001. f o r the two  The  s u p e r i o r on the m a t c h i n g t a s k s ,  g r e a t e s t d i f f e r e n c e i n mean e r r o r s c o r e s  r e a d i n g l e v e l s o c c u r r e d where (a) I n t e g r a t i o n o f b o t h a u d i t o r y  w i t h v i s u a l and temporal w i t h s p a t i a l s t i m u l i were i n v o l v e d (AT-VS and VS-AT), (b) the i n t e g r a t i o n was  v i s u a l to a u d i t o r y f o r t e m p o r a l  (VT-AT) i . e . c r o s s - m o d a l w i t h i n the t e m p o r a l d i m e n s i o n , and g r a t i o n was Although  i n t r a m o d a l to v i s i o n , and  stimuli  (c) the  inte-  t e m p o r a l (VT-VT) (see F i g u r e 4 ) .  h i g h r e a d e r s were s u p e r i o r to low r e a d e r s on the VS-VS t a s k ,  the d i f f e r e n c e was  Hypothesis  1.  not s i g n i f i c a n t  I t was  ( t = 1.49,  hypothesized  p_<. 1 3 ) .  t h a t above average r e a d e r s would  be s i g n i f i c a n t l y s u p e r i o r to below a v e r a g e r e a d e r s  i n sensory i n t e g r a t i o n  as measured by performance on m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g t a s k s . s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t Hypothesis  1 was  As a r e s u l t o f  the  i n v o l v i n g r e a d i n g l e v e l and m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g ,  considered  t o be s u p p o r t e d .  A d d i t i o n a l support was  gained  from t h e p a t t e r n s o f s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s o f m a t c h i n g t a s k s w i t h reading s u b s k i l l s .  Significant  v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and  t e m p o r a l i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s o f t h i r d grade boys  and g i r l s who  d i f f e r e n c e s were e v i d e n t i n the a u d i t o r y ,  were above average r e a d e r s , when compared w i t h below average  readers. Task D i f f i c u l t y Question  i n Cross-modal and  2 was  Intramodal  Matching  concerned w i t h the r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y of m a t c h i n g  t a s k s i n terms o f the v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and t h e i r combinations.  t e m p o r a l elements and  These r e l a t i o n s h i p s were i n v e s t i g a t e d i n a number of  ways. The  f i r s t and s i m p l e s t e s t i m a t e of d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l was  comparison of  mean e r r o r s c o r e s on the matching t a s k s (see T a b l e 9 and F i g u r e 4 ) .  The  60  12 r 11 10  9 8 O  \ /  c o <D  3  Low readers High readers  3h  _L  1  AT-AT  AT-VT  AT-VS  VT-AT  VT-VT  VT-VS  Matching Tasks Figure 4.  Sources of main e f f e c t f o r reading.  1  VS-AT  VS-VT  VS-VS  61  f o u r most d i f f i c u l t  t a s k s f o r b o t h r e a d i n g l e v e l s were t h e p u r e l y  t a s k s , AT-VT, VT-AT, VT-VT and AT-AT.  temporal  With an AT s t a n d a r d , a VT c o m p a r i s o n  gave r e l a t i v e l y h i g h e r r o r r a t e s f o r both groups o f r e a d e r s .  Error rates  i n c r e a s e d when b o t h s t a n d a r d and comparison elements were VT, e s p e c i a l l y for  low r e a d e r s .  These e r r o r r a t e s however, were s u r p a s s e d  r a t e s f o r AT comparisons w i t h VT i n i t i a l s t i m u l i . for  by t h e e r r o r  T h i s was e s p e c i a l l y so  low readers. Next i n d i f f i c u l t y  f o r b o t h r e a d i n g l e v e l s , and almost comparable i n  e r r o r r a t e s w i t h t h e f i r s t f o u r mentioned, were t a s k s w i t h a s t a n d a r d and a VS comparison, namely AT-VS and VT-VS. comparisons gave r e l a t i v e l y h i g h and a p p r o x i m a t e l y r e a d i n g l e v e l s , VS s t a n d a r d s for both reading l e v e l s .  temporal  W h i l e these VS  equal e r r o r r a t e s w i t h i n  reduced t h e e r r o r r a t e f o r a l l comparisons  Of t h e t a s k s w i t h a VS s t a n d a r d , VS-AT was most  d i f f i c u l t f o r l o w r e a d e r s w h i l e VS-VT was s l i g h t l y more d i f f i c u l t readers.  f o r high  Appearance o f t h e VS element i n any p o s i t i o n i n m a t c h i n g t a s k s  c o n t r i b u t e d to l o w e r e r r o r r a t e s . The  second s e t o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s was seen f o r t h e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e ,  i n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e main e f f e c t s f o r t h e s t a n d a r d and comparison s t i m u l u s p o r t i o n s of the matching tasks f o r the d i f f e r e n t reading l e v e l s .  A strong  main e f f e c t was found f o r t h e s t a n d a r d s t i m u l u s , F_ (2,280) = 422.68, p_ <£. 001 and a l e s s s t r o n g b u t s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r t h e c o m p a r i s o n element, F (2,280) = 45.89, p_ <. 001.  F i g u r e 5 shows t h e n a t u r e and source  of the main e f f e c t s f o r t h e s t a n d a r d and comparison elements.  The v e r y  h i g h s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e s t a n d a r d main e f f e c t was due t o t h e presence o f VS s t i m u l i making t h e t a s k s much e a s i e r , combined w i t h t h e g r e a t e r  diffi-  c u l t y o f matches where t h e s t a n d a r d s t i m u l u s was v i s u a l and t e m p o r a l .  The  same c o n t r i b u t o r y f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c e d t h e comparison main e f f e c t , b u t t o a  62  AT  VT Standard or Comparison Stimuli  Figure 5.  Sources of main effects f o r standard and comparison s t i m u l i .  VS  63  AT  V T Standard  Figure 6.  V S  Stimuli  Sources of standard X comparison  interaction.  64  lesser extent. The standard X comparison i n t e r a c t i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t , F_ (4,560) = 4.10,  p_ <. 003  (see Figure 6).  The i n t e r a c t i o n was due to two influences.  The lesser of these was a s l i g h t increase of error rate f o r VT comparisons with a VT standard as compared to an AT standard. was  The main influence  due to a greater increase i n error rate f o r AT comparisons with a VT  standard compared to AT comparisons with AT standard.  Since the main  effect for the standard stimulus was very strong, the i n d i c a t i o n i s that i t i s the presence of a VT standard which contributes most to the increasing d i f f i c u l t y of VT-VT and VT-AT tasks.  The remaining combinations  of task  elements showed almost no v a r i a t i o n in the relationship trends. There were no s i g n i f i c a n t double interactions of standard or comparison with reading, though the l a t t e r approached significance, J_ (2,280) = 2.37,  p_ <• 06.  This was due to the greater r e l a t i v e decrease i n error  rate f o r low readers f o r VT and VS comparisons.  The lack of s i g n i f i c a n t  interaction between the standard stimulus and reading indicated that the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the i n i t i a l stimulus i n matching contributed to a consistently higher performance by high readers. The t r i p l e i n t e r a c t i o n of standard X comparison X reading was cant, F_ (4,560) = 3.45,  p_ <. 01 (see Figure 7).  signifi-  The sources of this  interaction showed some of the same influences that were evident i n the stimulus X comparison i n t e r a c t i o n but modified by the high reader and reader differences.  low  The d i s o r d i n a l interaction of AT and VT elements was  again evident with the increase i n d i f f i c u l t y of the VT-AT task over the AT-AT task being more marked f o r low readers than high readers.  A second  source was due to the increase i n d i f f i c u l t y of the tasks with VT sons as the standard changed from AT to VT f o r low readers.  Task  compari-  65  ..4  _  »  _  \  A  h-  »  -Q  o  \  \  \  \  *  \\ \ \  \ \  \ \  \ \ \ \\ \ \\  \\ \° \  \ V  • A T  \  - L o wreaders High readers  \  \\ \  \\  \ \  AT  V T Standard  F i g u r e 7.  \  \  b  V S  Stimuli  Sources of the s t a n d a r d X comparison X r e a d i n g  interaction.  66  d i f f i c u l t y did not increase for high readers.  A further source arose out  the influence of VS as the comparison stimulus which contributed to the t r i p l e i n t e r a c t i o n though i t did not to the double i n t e r a c t i o n .  Relative  to the d i f f i c u l t y of the AT-VS task f o r both groups, the error rate f o r VS comparisons with VT standards was lower for low readers but higher for high readers. decrease  S i m i l a r l y for VS comparisons with VS standards,  the r e l a t i v e  in error rate for low readers was greater than for high readers.  The increase i n d i f f i c u l t y of temporal comparisons with VS compared to VS-VS task d i f f i c u l t y was  standards  greater f o r low readers than high  readers. Two  further trends contributed to the i n t e r a c t i o n .  tendency was  A slight disordinal  noticeable for temporal comparisons with VT and VS  for the high readers but not for low readers.  standards  Here AT comparisons were  more d i f f i c u l t with VT standards and VT comparisons more d i f f i c u l t with VS standards.  There was  an increasing difference i n mean error scores between  AT and VS comparisons as the i n i t i a l stimulus changed from AT to VT to VS, for low readers.  This was  due to the higher d i f f i c u l t y of AT comparisons  with VT standards and the sharper decrease i n error rate f o r low  readers  when both comparison and standard stimuli were v i s u a l and s p a t i a l .  The  opposite trends were seen f o r high readers. As has already been indicated there was no main e f f e c t f o r sex i n the analysis of variance, nor was and sex.  there a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n of reading  However, as Kirk (1968) points out, whenever a s i g n i f i c a n t  interaction occurs i t indicates the need for i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and q u a l i f i c a t i o n of the main effects i n the l i g h t of differences among s p e c i f i c means at specific levels.  Although  the majority of interactions i n v o l v i n g sex  were not s i g n i f i c a n t , a s i g n i f i c a n t double i n t e r a c t i o n suggested  that some  67  comments be made. Reference  to Figure 8 shows that g i r l s made more errors on purely  temporal tasks than did boys, this being e s p e c i a l l y so for high reading girls.  Low reading g i r l s made s l i g h t l y lower error scores on VS-VS tasks  than high reading g i r l s while low boys made more errors on VS-AT tasks compared to the other three groups. Though the double interaction of standard stimulus with sex was not s i g n i f i c a n t , the comparison X sex interaction was s i g n i f i c a n t , F_ (2,280) = 4.33,  p_ <. 01.  This effect was due to VT patterns as comparisons being  more d i f f i c u l t f o r g i r l s than boys. for AT and VS comparisons.  There were almost no sex differences  Thus the presence of a VT comparison stimulus  in matching tasks was a s i g n i f i c a n t discriminator between male and female readers. Of the t r i p l e interactions involving sex none was s i g n i f i c a n t . trends were apparent  Similar  i n the data however, f o r i n the standard X reading X  sex and the comparison X reading X sex interactions g i r l s had higher error rates than boys for VT comparisons, low g i r l s having more errors than low boys with VT standard stimuli, and low g i r l s having lower error rates than low boys with VS i n both the standard and comparison conditions. The f i n a l and quadruple interaction of standard X comparison X reading X sex was s i g n i f i c a n t , F_ (4,560) = 2.48, p_ <. 04.  While s p e c i f i c analysis  of the sources, and interpretation of the meaning, of the i n t e r a c t i o n do not appear to be easy or warranted, inspection shows that a number of the features of relationship and interaction already mentioned are present and contributory. In order to further examine the significance of, and s p e c i f i c e f f e c t s within, the standard X comparison X reading interaction, a number of  68  12r  11 h //  o*'  Low readers  10  8  OJ"  d to  V  High readers ^  c 0) °  6  o*  v.  \ \  Girls  \\  Boys  \  \  \  1  AT-AT  AT-VT  AT-VS  _L  VT-AT  _L  VT-VT  6  _L VT-VS  VS-AT  VS-VT  Matching Tasks Figure 8. Matching task error scores f o r reading groups.  VS-VS  69  pairwise comparisons were made of differences i n mean error rates, using Dunn's multiple comparison procedure (Kirk, 1968).  This procedure  permits both orthogonal and non-orthogonal comparisons among differences in means for repeated measures designs. was  The oc = .01 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e  s p l i t up evenly among the planned comparisons to give a conservative  test of the differences between mean error scores. In the l i t e r a t u r e review, reference was made to the modal s p e c i f i c view of sensory functioning which attributes s p e c i f i c locations and types of information processing to each modality. s p e c i f i c i t y i t would be expected  From the theory of modal  that the processing of temporal informa-  tion i n the v i s u a l modality would produce the highest error rate. was  This  investigated by comparing the difference i n mean error rates for those  tasks where temporal information was processed i n the v i s u a l modality i n contrast to the auditory modality.  In comparing the AT-AT and VT-VT  tasks the only difference i s the modality used for temporal processing. The same holds for comparisons of the AT-VS and VT-VS tasks and of the VS-AT and VS-VT tasks.  Error rate differences for these p a i r s of tasks  were tested by pairwise comparisons.  The r e s u l t s of these comparisons  can be seen i n Table 10. Similarly, from the reviewed l i t e r a t u r e , some investigators held that cross-^modal integrations were h i e r a r c h i c a l l y more d i f f i c u l t than integrations.  This view was  intramodal  examined by comparing the error rate d i f f e r -  ences to see i f cross-modal integrations would produce higher mean error scores (see Table 10).  Thus AT intramodal errors were compared with the  two temporal and cross-modal task error rates (AT-AT vs AT-VT and AT-AT vs VT-AT), and s i m i l a r l y for the VT intramodal task (VT-VT vs VT-AT and VT-VT vs AT-VT).  Since VS-VS intramodal tasks were obviously easier than  70  cross-modal tasks w i t h temporal standards, standards  o n l y c r o s s - m o d a l t a s k s w i t h VS  were compared w i t h t h e VS-VS i n t r a m o d a l  t a s k s (VS-VS v s VS-AT  and VS-VS v s VS-VT). T a b l e 10 D i f f e r e n c e s Between Means f o r P a i r w i s e Comparisons Low Readers  High Readers  Temporal Comparisons between V i s u a l and A u d i t o r y Difference AT-AT : VT-VT  -1.6  Difference -0.8  AT-VS : VT-VS  0.1  -0.3  VS-AT : VS-VT  0.6  -0.3  Cross- -modal and I n t r a m o d a l AT-AT : AT-VT  -0.8  -0.6  *  AT-AT : VT-AT VT-VT : VT-AT  Comparisons  -2.0 -0.4  VT-VT : AT-VT .  -0.9 -0.1  0.8  0.2 A.  VS-VS : VS-AT  -3.4  VS-VS : VS-VT  -2.1  •A-  -0.8 -1.1  P <.oi For s i x t e e n planned comparisons a d i f f e r e n c e i n mean e r r o r r a t e o f 1.6 would be r e q u i r e d f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e a t « = .01 w i t h 560 degrees o f freedom and w i t h a MS e r r o r v a l u e of 8.15.  R e s u l t s showed t h a t t h e o n l y  c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were f o r low r e a d e r s  signifi-  i n comparing AT-AT w i t h VT-VT,  AT-AT w i t h VT-AT and f o r t h e two comparisons w i t h VS-VS t a s k s . f i r s t o f these s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n d i c a t e s t h a t p r o c e s s i n g  While the temporal  71  information i n the v i s u a l modality i s indeed more d i f f i c u l t  than i n the  auditory modality, (thus supporting the modal-specific view), this held true only f o r low readers.  The other VT against AT differences for low  readers showed small and i n s i g n i f i c a n t trends opposing the modal s p e c i f i c view, with lower error score differences favouring the VT element.  For  high readers a l l differences were small and i n s i g n i f i c a n t with VT tasks more d i f f i c u l t than AT. For the intramodal and cross-modal d i f f i c u l t y  comparisons,  the v i s u a l to  auditory (cross-modal) integration within the temporal dimension (VT-AT) was s i g n i f i c a n t l y more d i f f i c u l t than AT-AT (intramodal) integration, but again only f o r low readers. approach significance.  A similar trend f o r high readers did not  The cross-modal match VT-AT was also s l i g h t l y but  not s i g n i f i c a n t l y more d i f f i c u l t that VT-VT (intramodal), f o r both groups of readers.  The complementary temporal cross-modal integration AT-VT  when compared to AT-AT and VT-VT (intramodal) integrations, showed crossmodal to be easier than intramodal i n the v i s u a l modality and more difficult  than intramodal i n the auditory modality.  Neither of the d i f f e r -  ences was s i g n i f i c a n t . Spatial to temporal integrations were more d i f f i c u l t than VS intramodal integrations, but only s i g n i f i c a n t l y so f o r low readers.  Spatial to  temporal s h i f t s within the v i s u a l modality were less d i f f i c u l t than s p a t i a l to temporal s h i f t s which also involved v i s u a l to auditory integration.  Item Analyses The f i n a l method of examining  the r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y  of matching tasks  consisted of analyses of item c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s within sub-tasks f o r the t o t a l sample of readers, based on the point b i s e r i a l correlations of the  72  items w i t h the n i n e t a s k s .  S i n c e the m a t c h i n g t a s k s were good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s  between above average and below average r e a d e r s i t was  reasoned t h a t  items  w h i c h d i s c r i m i n a t e d w e l l between i n d i v i d u a l s of the t o t a l sample, w i t h i n each t a s k , would a l s o be good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between h i g h and Such items would be those w i t h the h i g h e s t the t o t a l sample.  involved.  readers.  point b i s e r i a l correlations for  These items c o u l d then be f u r t h e r a n a l y z e d and  i n terms of o r g a n i z a t i o n a l main e f f e c t s f o r s t a n d a r d and c o n d i t i o n s and  low  i n terms of s t r u c t u r e of items and  classified  comparison  the t y p e s of i n t e g r a t i o n  T w e n t y - s i x items a t t a i n e d a p o i n t b i s e r i a l c o r r e l a t i o n of .40  above f o r one  or more of the n i n e t a s k s  (see T a b l e 11.)  When p l o t t e d  i n a f r e q u e n c y d i s t r i b u t i o n , p o i n t b i s e r i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s of .40 and r e p r e s e n t e d the upper 33 p e r c e n t of the 270 were a n l a y z e d a c c o r d i n g Item c o m p l e x i t y .  and  correlations.  above  These items  t o a number of c r i t e r i a !  T a b l e 11 shows the s t r u c t u r e of the p a i r e d  items.  W h i l e the more complex items w i t h f i v e , s i x or seven s t r u c t u r a l u n i t s ( i . e . d o t , beep, or l i g h t f l a s h ) might be e x p e c t e d t o be more o f t e n d i s c r i m i n a t i n g i t e m s , i t was r a t h e r than s i m p l y or diminished task.  the  the r e q u i r e m e n t s of the i n t e g r a t i o n t a s k  the number of u n i t s i n the s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s  t h a t enhanced  the f i n a l d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power of an i t e m w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r  Items w h i c h were good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s i n one  good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s on o t h e r t a s k s .  t a s k were sometimes not  Thus h a l f of the f o u r - u n i t items  were s t r o n g d i s c r i m i n a t o r s i n at l e a s t t h r e e , or i n as many as e i g h t of t a s k s , w h i l e s i x of the s i x and i n o n l y one  of the  Item s t r u c t u r e . and  11 were 'same'.  the  s e v e n - u n i t items were good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s  tasks. Of the 26 items chosen, 15 matches were ' d i f f e r e n t ' None of the d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items had  the l o c a t i o n of  the p o i n t d i f f e r e n c e s o l e l y at the b e g i n n i n g of the s t a n d a r d  and  73  T a b l e 11 Point B i s e r i a l Correlations for Discriminating Item  Stimuli  6  .... a b  8  .. ..  9  ... .  AT-AT AT-VT AT-VS VT-AT VT-VT VT-VS VS-AT VS-VT VS-VS  .41  .43  10  ... .  11  ....  12  ... .  13  ...  Items  .48  .54  .41  .43  .42  .43  .45  .57  .43  .43  .51 .43  .47  .42 .50  .45 .  .43  .58  .43.  .46  .40  .64  14  .40  .40  .51  15  .44  .54  .43  .40  .46  16  .51  .46  17  .42  18  .43  19  .53  .42 .52  .52  .43  .55  .41  .47 .40  .42  .40  .49 .43  .45  .40  21 22  .40  .42  .50  74  Item  Stimuli  AT-AT AT-VT AT-VS VT-AT VT-VT VT-VS VS-AT VS-VT VS-VS  23  24  .43  .40  .40  25 26  .48 .42  .50  .43  .40  .47  .42  .43  .58  .47  .40  .44  .46  .43  27  .48  29  .45  30 31  .43 .43  33  .46  .44 .46  34 35  .43 .41  Standard stimulus ^Comparison stimulus  comparison s t i m u l i .  In two items the difference was at both the beginning  and middle of the items (e.g. item 21), f o r three items i t was at both the beginning and end (e.g. item 22).  In one item the point of difference  was at the middle (item 33), i n two items i t was at the end (e.g. item 16), and i n seven items i t was at both middle and end (e.g. item 19).  In a l l  75  11 o f the 'same' items the s u b j e c t had to w a i t u n t i l the comparison p a t t e r n was completed b e f o r e b e i n g a b l e to make a match.  Thus i n t h e b u l k o f  d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items t h e m i d d l e and end of the s t i m u l i were t h e key p o i n t s where c o r r e c t o r erroneous judgements c o u l d be made.  Of t h e n i n e  items  w h i c h were d i s c r i m i n a t i n g i n t h e VS-VS t a s k , where t h e s t r u c t u r a l u n i t s were viewed s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , seven had t h e p o i n t of d i f f e r e n c e c o n c e n t r a t e d at the end o r m i d d l e and end.  F i f t e e n out o f 17 items w h i c h c o n t a i n e d  clumps o f t h r e e o r f o u r u n i t s appeared among t h e d i s c r i m i n a t i n g i t e m s . Items w i t h i n t a s k s .  Three of the p u r e l y temporal  t a s k s (which had t h e  h i g h e s t e r r o r r a t e s ) namely VT-VT, AT-AT and VT-AT, had the s m a l l e s t number of d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items  ( f i v e , f i v e , and s i x r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .  The  VS-AT t a s k , w h i c h r e q u i r e d i n t e g r a t i o n s b o t h f r o m v i s u a l t o a u d i t o r y and s p a t i a l t o t e m p o r a l , had the g r e a t e s t number o f d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items ( 1 6 ) . The remainder of t a s k s had e i t h e r n i n e o r t e n i t e m s .  The i m p l i c a t i o n i s  t h a t the e a s i e r and more d i f f i c u l t items a r e n o t t h e b e s t d i s c r i m i n a t o r s by v i r t u e of the l a r g e r numbers of s u b j e c t s s u c c e e d i n g  o r f a i l i n g on these  items. By comparing p o i n t b i s e r i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r each r e a d i n g l e v e l w i t h those o f t h e t o t a l sample f o r each t a s k i t was p o s s i b l e t o d e t e r m i n e i f the items were e q u a l l y d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f o r b o t h low and h i g h r e a d e r s .  The  g e n e r a l p a t t e r n was f o r t h e p u r e l y t e m p o r a l p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f items t o be l e s s d i s c r i m i n a t i n g b u t e q u a l l y so f o r h i g h and low r e a d e r s .  A middle  w i t h v i s u a l comparisons were e q u a l l y d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f o r b o t h l e v e l s or s l i g h t l y more d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f o r low r e a d e r s .  group  reading  Presentations of  items w i t h a VS s t a n d a r d were e i t h e r e q u a l l y d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f o r b o t h r e a d i n g l e v e l s o r d i s c r i m i n a t i n g o n l y f o r low r e a d e r s .  76  The f i n a l b l o c k o f most complex (7 u n i t ) items when p r e s e n t e d i n the VT s t a n d a r d c o n d i t i o n produced no d i s c r i m i n a t i n g i t e m s , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t the d i f f i c u l t y o f these i t e m s made them no l o n g e r good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s . V i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l i n t e g r a t i o n s .  Discriminating  items were a l s o c l a s s i f i e d i n terms of t h e elements i n v o l v e d i n the i n t e g r a t i o n and the n a t u r e o f the i n t e g r a t i o n s thus produced. i t e m by t a s k appearances,  Of the 80  items w i t h t e m p o r a l s t a n d a r d s o c c u r r e d 45 times  and i t e m s w i t h t e m p o r a l comparisons  appeared 52 t i m e s .  These i t e m s w i t h  t e m p o r a l s t a n d a r d s comprised 25 i t e m s w i t h AT s t a n d a r d s and 20 w i t h VT standards.  Items w i t h temporal comparisons were e v e n l y d i v i d e d between  AT and VT.  Items w i t h VS s t a n d a r d s numbered 35 w h i l e 28 had VS  comparisons.  I f the known d i f f i c u l t y of VT s t a n d a r d p a t t e r n s and ease of VS s t a n d a r d s t i m u l i i s a p p l i e d t o these f i n d i n g s the s u g g e s t i o n i s t h a t t h e s m a l l e r number o f i t e m s w i t h VT s t a n d a r d s as d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items i s due t o t h e greater d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l .  The o c c u r r e n c e of items c o n t a i n i n g VS  elements  s i m i l a r l y r e f l e c t s the r e l a t i v e ease of matches w i t h VS s t a n d a r d s and i n c r e a s e d d i f f i c u l t y o f matches w i t h VS  slightly  comparisons.  Twenty s i x items i n v o l v e d double i n t e g r a t i o n s ( a u d i t o r y w i t h v i s u a l and s p a t i a l w i t h temporal) and the same number of items r e q u i r e d to t e m p o r a l i n t e g r a t i o n s .  spatial  Temporal t o s p a t i a l i n t e g r a t i o n s o c c u r r e d i n  19 of the items w h i l e a u d i t o r y to v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n s and the c o n v e r s e o c c u r r e d i n 20 and 22 i t e m s r e s p e c t i v e l y . Thus i t would appear t h a t f o r those items which b e s t d i s c r i m i n a t e between good and poor r e a d e r s , f r e q u e n c y o f o c c u r r e n c e of an element  i s a measure  of d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power w h i l e i n f r e q u e n c y o f o c c u r r e n c e i s a measure of the item's d i f f i c u l t y or n o n - d i f f i c u l t y .  A c c o r d i n g l y , matches i n v o l v i n g  two  77  integrations are of s i m i l a r discrimination power to those requiring only a s p a t i a l to temporal integration.  Temporal to s p a t i a l integrations would  be l e s s discriminating and more d i f f i c u l t .  Items with VT standards are  more d i f f i c u l t and less useful discriminators than AT standards while AT and VT comparisons are approximately equal i n d i f f i c u l t y and tion power.  discrimina-  Of the intramodal matches, integrations within AT and  within  VT dimensions are equally more d i f f i c u l t and l e s s discriminating than matches within the VS dimension. This analysis of the data suggests that cross-modal matches are not i n t r i n s i c a l l y more d i f f i c u l t than intramodal matches, the d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l depending more upon the temporal-spatial  dimensions than upon the  modalities  themselves. By v i r t u e of the number of discriminating items i n the VS-AT task, this would appear to be one of the best tasks to discriminate between above average and below average readers,  i f a single auditory v i s u a l integration  task were to be used for that purpose..  Hypotheses 2.1  and 2.2.  The hypotheses a r i s i n g from Question two  dealt  with the q u a l i t a t i v e differences between above average and below average readers i n terms of d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s in the processing of information  i n t r i n s i c to the integration tasks.  of s p e c i f i c types  Quantitative  and  q u a l i t a t i v e differences were found between the two reading l e v e l s on s p e c i f i c tasks, s p e c i f i c types of integration and with s p e c i f i c elements of integration tasks. of theAintegration  S i g n i f i c a n t interactions occurred  between elements  tasks, their order of presentation and reading  Consequently Hypotheses 2.1  and 2.2  were considered  level.  to be supported.  78  Cognitive Processes Question three was concerned with d i f f e r e n t cognitive processes employed by good and poor readers on modality matching tasks, as inferred from the factor structure and loadings produced by exploratory factor analyses. Since there was no s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r sex i n the analysis of variance, the matching scores were collapsed across sex within reading levels.  Pooled error scores f o r the matching tasks were intercorrelated  separately f o r each reading l e v e l (see Table 12). Table 12 Intercorrelations Tasks  AT-AT  AT-AT  of Matching Tasks f o r Low and High Readers  AT-VT  AT-VS  VT-AT  VT-VT  VT-VS  VS-AT  VS-VT  VS-VS  .585  .499  .603  .640  .579  .442  .603  .340  .553  .551  .692  .450  .358  .265  .271  .517  .519  .517  .438  .284  .217  .588  .485  .464  .350  .404  .444  .468  .308  .365  .467  .457  .287  .320  .466  AT-VT  .474  AT-VS  .546  .580  VT-AT  .472  .634  .512  VT-VT  .405  .317  .242  .387  VT-VS  .585  .519  .544  .417  .429  VS-AT  .401  .386  .666  .288  .263  .610  VS-VT  .611  .459  .563  .409  .533  .614  .504  VS-VS  .264  .489  .401  .314  .277  .483  .569  Note.  .367 .510  High readers are above the diagonal, low readers below.  Inspection of the matrices showed some i n t e r e s t i n g differences between the two reading groups i n the patterns of i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s .  For those  intercorrelations where the standard stimulus was VS the c o e f f i c i e n t s were generally higher f o r low readers than high readers except f o r the VS-AT  79  tasks.  When VS-AT was intercorrelated with the purely temporal tasks with  VT standards for low readers, the c o e f f i c i e n t s were considerably lower than for high readers.  When VS-AT was intercorrelated with any task with  a VS comparison the c o e f f i c i e n t s for low readers were considerably higher than for high readers.  On a l l these task i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s for high  readers, the c o e f f i c i e n t s were consistently even.  When the VT-VT task was  intercorrelated with the other purely temporal tasks plus AT-VS and VS-AT, the c o e f f i c i e n t s for the high readers were considerably higher than for low readers.  The remaining i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s were r e l a t i v e l y similar  for both groups of readers. The matrices were factor analyzed by p r i n c i p a l components analysis with u n i t i e s i n the diagonal, followed by a varimax rotation of the factor loading matrix.  The c r i t e r i o n adopted for retention of factors was the  Kaiser-Guttman c r i t e r i o n of eigenvalues greater than unity. Although the p r i n c i p a l components solution with orthogonal rotation was considered to be the most appropriate form of analysis (Hakstian & Bay, 1973; Timm, 1975), other combinations of common-factor solutions (maximum l i k e l i h o o d procedure) and p r i n c i p a l components solutions, with both orthogonal (varimax) and oblique (Harris-Kaiser) rotations were carried out as a check on the o r i g i n a l analyses.  Since these alternative analyses produced very similar  r e s u l t s , the o r i g i n a l p r i n c i p a l components solutions with varimax rotation were retained. Analysis for the low readers gave only one eigenvalue greater than 1 (4.75) with the next highest being 0.99. was retained.  Consequently this second factor  Results for the low readers are given i n Table 13.  The f i r s t factor had i t s heaviest loadings from those tasks which include a VS element.  The second factor had i t s main loadings from tasks  80  T a b l e 13 P r i n c i p a l Components A n a l y s i s w i t h Va r imax Ro t a t i o n : Low Readers Factor I  Task  Factor I I  AT-AT  .328  .715  AT-VT  .451  .607  AT-VS  .689  .424  VT-AT  .197  .758  VT-VT  .067  .741  VT-VS  .634  .506  VS-AT  .885  .137  VS-VT  .530  .606  VS-VS  .772  .151  2.893  2.849  50.38  49.62  Component  Variance  % Component  Variance  w i t h temporal elements.  The o n l y two t a s k s w i t h an i n i t i a l  temporal  s t i m u l u s element w h i c h d i d n o t weight t h e second f a c t o r more h i g h l y were those where t h e comparison s t i m u l u s was VS (AT-VS and VT-VS). these cases t h e l o a d i n g s on t h e f i r s t  I n both  (VS) f a c t o r were h i g h e r , which  suggest-  ed t h a t where v i s u a l s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l i n t e g r a t i o n s a r e i n v o l v e d f o r low r e a d e r s  the VS element p l a y s a predominant p a r t , even i f i t i s n o t t h e  i n i t i a l stimulus.  Something o f t h i s i n f l u e n c e o f VS s t i m u l i as comparisons  was e v i d e n t i n t h e p a t t e r n s o f i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s a l r e a d y mentioned.  It  i s c l e a r t h a t the a l i g n m e n t o f f a c t o r s was on t h e s p a t i a l - t e m p o r a l d i m e n s i o n r a t h e r than the v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y m o d a l i t i e s .  I f i t had been  81  the m o d a l i t y o f p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s which l o a d e d t h e f a c t o r s t h e t a s k s w i t h VT standards  would have loaded  the t a s k s w i t h VS s t a n d a r d s , which was n o t t h e case.  t h e same f a c t o r as A further irregularity  showed t h e VS-VT t a s k t o l o a d s l i g h t l y more h e a v i l y on t h e t e m p o r a l factor.  A p o s s i b l e r e a s o n f o r t h i s was t h a t VT as a comparison s t i m u l u s  was c l e a r l y a p o w e r f u l  element i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e .  Both o f t h e  f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e d e q u a l l y t o t h e common v a r i a n c e o f t h e a n a l y s i s . F a c t o r s f o r t h e h i g h r e a d e r s a r e shown i n T a b l e 14.  Eigenvalues f o r  h i g h r e a d e r s were 4.65 and 1.01, and thus two f a c t o r s were r e t a i n e d . T a b l e 14 Principal  Components A n a l y s i s w i t h Varimax R o t a t i o n : H i g h Readers  Task  Factor I  Factor I I  AT-AT  .656  .515  AT-VT  .854  .101  AT-VS  .775  .149  VT-AT  .684  .387  VT-VT  .798  .256  VT-VS  .559  .473  VS-AT  .408  .588  VS-VT  .177  .767  VS-VS  .109  .775  Component V a r i a n c e  3.387  2.273  % Component V a r i a n c e  59.84  40.16  82  In  c o n t r a s t t o t h e low r e a d e r s , F a c t o r I f o r h i g h r e a d e r s has i t s  l o a d i n g s p r i m a r i l y from t h e t e m p o r a l element, and p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e temporal element i n t h e i n i t i a l o r s t a n d a r d p o s i t i o n .  The t h r e e t a s k s w i t h VS a s  the i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s have t h e h i g h e s t l o a d i n g s on F a c t o r I I . was t h e o p p o s i t e f o r l o w r e a d e r s .  This also  I n f u r t h e r c o n t r a s t t o the low readers,  where VS and AT i n t e g r a t i o n s o c c u r f o r h i g h r e a d e r s , i f VS i s i n t h e comparison p o s i t i o n i t does n o t l o a d more h e a v i l y on t h e VS f a c t o r . o f i n t e r e s t t h a t t h e temporal  It i s  f a c t o r f o r l o w r e a d e r s appears t o be loaded  h e a v i l y by t a s k s w i t h t h e temporal element a l s o i n t h e comparison p o s i t i o n , w h i l e f o r h i g h r e a d e r s t h e l o a d i n g s a r e more from t h e temporal the s t a n d a r d p o s i t i o n .  The f a c t o r s i n t h e a n a l y s i s f o r h i g h  element i n  readers  c o n t r i b u t e d d i f f e r e n t l y t o t h e common v a r i a n c e than t h e f a c t o r s f o r l o w r e a d e r s , w i t h t h e temporal f a c t o r ( F a c t o r I ) c o n t r i b u t i n g a p p r o x i m a t e l y 20% more v a r i a n c e than F a c t o r I I . Comparison o f t h e a n a l y s e s f o r t h e two r e a d i n g l e v e l s i n d i c a t e d d i f f e r ences i n t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f temporal and s p a t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n and i n t h e p a r t p l a y e d by t h e i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s i n i n t e g r a t i o n t a s k s .  F o r competent r e a d e r s  the n a t u r e o f t h e i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s i n terms o f i t s temporal o r s p a t i a l q u a l i t i e s , d i c t a t e d w h i c h f a c t o r was l o a d e d by t h e t a s k .  F o r these  readers  t h e r e appeared t o be l i t t l e d i s t i n c t i o n between v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y m o d a l i t i e s i n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e temporal  dimension.  Whether t h e i n i t i a l t e m p o r a l  stimulus  was v i s u a l (VT) o r a u d i t o r y (AT), o r was f o l l o w e d by a c r o s s - m o d a l o r i n t r a modal match, a l l t a s k s had s i m i l a r h i g h l o a d i n g s on t h e temporal  factor.  L e s s a b l e r e a d e r s , on t h e o t h e r hand appeared t o be more i n f l u e n c e d in  t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f temporal  s p a t i a l element.  i n f o r m a t i o n by t h e presence o f t h e v i s u a l  When t e m p o r a l  s t a n d a r d s t i m u l i (AT and VT) were matched  83  w i t h a VS comparison, the l o a d i n g was  h i g h e s t on the VS f a c t o r .  i n those t a s k s r e q u i r i n g i n t e g r a t i o n of t e m p o r a l and w i t h i n the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y  Similarly,  s p a t i a l elements  (VT-VS and VS-VT), the f a c t o r l o a d i n g s were  almost e q u a l w i t h the s l i g h t l y h i g h e r l o a d i n g on the element o c c u r r i n g the comparison s t i m u l u s r a t h e r than the i n i t i a l Thus f o r low r e a d e r s  as  stimulus.  the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y appeared to p l a y a d i f f e r e n t  and l e s s v e r s a t i l e . r o l e , i t s f u n c t i o n b e i n g somewhat m o d a l - s p e c i f i c , w i t h a g r e a t e r f a c i l i t y f o r the p r o c e s s i n g of s p a t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n . average r e a d e r s  The  above  i n c o n t r a s t seemed to p r o c e s s temporal i n f o r m a t i o n e q u a l l y  w e l l i n b o t h the a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l m o d a l i t i e s .  In b o t h o f the  analyses  the i n t r a m o d a l and c r o s s - m o d a l t a s k s AT-AT, VT-VT, AT-VT and VT-AT loaded s i m i l a r l y and h i g h e s t on the t e m p o r a l f a c t o r . t h a t s i m i l a r c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s i n g occurs  T h i s appeared to i n d i c a t e  f o r b o t h types of i n t e g r a t i o n ,  w i t h c r o s s - m o d a l i n t e g r a t i o n not a h i g h e r order p r o c e s s than i n t e g r a t i o n within  modality.  H y p o t h e s i s 3.  R e s u l t s of the e x p l o r a t o r y f a c t o r a n a l y s e s  indicated  d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r s t r u c t u r e o f the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i c e s f o r above average and below average r e a d e r s .  L o a d i n g s on the f a c t o r s i n terms of  the i n f l u e n c e of t h e v i s u a l s p a t i a l element was groups. The  As a consequence, H y p o t h e s i s 3 was  a l s o d i f f e r e n t f o r the  considered  c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s i n g of s p a t i a l , t e m p o r a l ,  to be  supported.  v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y  t i o n i s d i f f e r e n t f o r above a v e r a g e and below average  two  readers.  informa-  84  CHAPTER  VI  DISCUSSION  The in  greatest  usefulness  the c o n s t r u c t i o n  but  of s p e c i f i c  i n the c o n t r i b u t i o n  cataloging human  and  o f r e s e a r c h may  which  purpose  abilities level, was  be  remedial techniques,  i t makes  proper description  to  the  of the v a r i e t y  of  abilities. J.  The  not  of t h i s  s t u d y was  o f above a v e r a g e  and  to i n v e s t i g a t e  below  average  as m e a s u r e d b y c r o s s - m o d a l a n d  t o u n d e r s t a n d more a b o u t  the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  of  visual,  auditory,  to  rectify  some o f  spatial  the sensory  intramodal matching  o f good  and  and  integration  poor  tasks.  grade The  to read through  readers i n the  temporal information.  the weaknesses e v i d e n t  (p.433)  readers at the t h i r d  the process of l e a r n i n g  more a b o u t  Torgesen  An  aim learning  integration  integral  aim  was  i n p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h on m o d a l i t y  matching. Of  particular  confounding  of  emphasis  t e m p o r a l and  t a s k s by  including  temporal  elements  objective  i n the l a t t e r spatial  and  the need  elements of v i s u a l  a l l nine combinations of auditory, of  integration,  a manner as p o s s i b l e .  reliability  r e g a r d was  prevent c e i l i n g  for  intelligence  differences  the  m o d a l i t y matching  tasks  stimuli visual,  p r e s e n t e d i n as p r e c i s e , Other such  effects  specifically  to reading  a t an  i n matching and  consistent  and  increase  tasks,  b e i n g compared,  the  spatial  emphases w e r e t o  f o r the matching  i n the groups  to a v o i d  and age  to to  control relate  where  decoding  85  s k i l l s have generally been mastered, and where perceptual development has reached an asymptote.  A further emphasis was to make a more s p e c i f i c and  detailed analysis of the relationship to reading a b i l i t y of the auditory, v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and temporal elements of integration i n terms of their combinations i n the matching tasks.  Reading, Modality Matching and Intelligence Reading a b i l i t y was assessed by an instrument which placed the average reading l e v e l f o r over 500 grade three students at approximately one year above actual grade placement.  I t was from above and below this average  that the reading groups were selected.  The limited size of the grade three  population available and the constraints of matching for i n t e l l i g e n c e , accounted for the i n c l u s i o n of some below average readers who were reading above t h e i r grade placement l e v e l .  This fact was somewhat mitigated by  the widely held view i n the lower mainland of B r i t i s h Columbia that the reading tests i n question give i n f l a t e d reading measures of up to one year above grade placement.  In spite of these limitations the two reading  a b i l i t y l e v e l s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t i n matching a b i l i t y . Within the l i m i t a t i o n s of group i n t e l l i g e n c e tests, and with the further constraint that only the non-verbal battery was administered, the four groups were matched f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e .  It i s l i k e l y that good readers would  have performed r e l a t i v e l y better on a verbal i n t e l l i g e n c e test with the converse f o r poor readers.  S i m i l a r l y , the poorer readers may possibly  have performed r e l a t i v e l y better on the non-verbal test i n r e l a t i o n to the good readers (Hage & Stroud, 1959).  In addition, while the mean I.Q. and  standard deviation for the grade three population were almost i d e n t i c a l with the Canadian standardization figures, these data f o r the selected  86  groups were a l i t t l e below the p o p u l a t i o n f i g u r e s , due l a r g e l y t o the e x c l u s i o n of more o f the above average r e a d e r s and more h i g h l y s t u d e n t s by t h e matching  intelligent  process.  W h i l e t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the grade t h r e e p o p u l a t i o n were g e n e r a l l y i n k e e p i n g w i t h the moderate, p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n commonly found between i n t e l l i g e n c e and r e a d i n g ( C h e s t e r , 1974), the r e l a t i o n s h i p c l e a r l y for  the s e l e c t e d groups o f r e a d e r s and f o r sex groups.  varied  I t must be k e p t  i n mind t h a t r e s t r i c t i o n of range due to s e l e c t i o n of r e a d i n g groups i n f l u e n c e d the c o r r e l a t i o n s o f measures based on t h e s e g r o u p i n g s .  Although  matched f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e , p o o r e r r e a d e r s d i f f e r e d from good r e a d e r s i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p of I.Q. hension.  t o the r e a d i n g s k i l l s o f word r e c o g n i t i o n and compre-  C o r r e l a t i o n s f o r h i g h r e a d e r s were e s s e n t i a l l y a l l s i g n i f i c a n t ,  especially for girls.  None of the c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the low r e a d e r s  ed s i g n i f i c a n c e .  T h i s was  for  Few  low r e a d e r s .  information.  approach-  i n s p i t e o f the g r e a t e r v a r i a b i l i t y o f s c o r e s  of the reviewed r e s e a r c h a r t i c l e s p r o v i d e d comparable  I n the most comparable s t u d y Bryden (1972) found  e q u a l c o r r e l a t i o n s of .35 and  .37, f o r good and poor r e a d e r s  approximately  respectively,  between the C a t t e l l IPAT i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t and t o t a l s c o r e s on t h e Gates M a c G i n i t i e Reading T e s t s .  There was no breakdown i n t o r e a d i n g s u b s k i l l s .  Bryden's s u b j e c t s had mean I.Q.s c h i l d r e n of t h i s  a p p r o x i m a t e l y 15 p o i n t s h i g h e r than the  study.  For t h e c h i l d r e n of the p r e s e n t s t u d y i t would appear t h a t i n t e l l i g e n c e was  l e s s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o word r e c o g n i t i o n than to comprehension f o r  boys, e s p e c i a l l y f o r low r e a d i n g boys.  The same h e l d f o r low r e a d i n g g i r l s .  T h i s would be i n k e e p i n g w i t h the f i n d i n g s of those s t u d i e s where c o n t r o l l i n g for  i n t e l l i g e n c e a f f e c t e d the c o r r e l a t i o n o f matching  but n o t matching w i t h word r e c o g n i t i o n .  w i t h comprehension  I f word r e c o g n i t i o n i s more  87  heavily  grounded i n p e r c e p t u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n  i s not a surprising finding.  One would expect f a c t o r s o t h e r than p e r c e p t u a l  d e c o d i n g and i n t e l l i g e n c e t o i n f l u e n c e  comprehension, among w h i c h a r e a  number o f f a c t o r s c o n s i d e r e d t o c o n t r i b u t e The  than i s comprehension, t h i s  t o sex d i f f e r e n c e s  i n reading.  low r e l a t i o n s h i p of I.Q. t o r e a d i n g f o r low r e a d e r s s u g g e s t s t h a t some  other intervening  f a c t o r s cause i n t e r f e r e n c e .  Among these must be s e n s o r y  i n t e g r a t i o n , w h i c h b r i n g s b o t h unique and common v a r i a n c e t o t h e t r i p a r t i t e relationship. I n s p i t e o f some c o n t r a d i c t o r y  r e s u l t s i n studies  i n v e s t i g a t i n g the  r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n and i n t e l l i g e n c e , the consensus o f findings and  s u p p o r t s a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p o f I.Q. and m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g ,  between m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g and r e a d i n g o v e r and above t h e i n f l u e n c e o f  i n t e l l i g e n c e (Beery, 1967; B i r c h & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966;  Kahn & B i r c h , 1968).  Some s t u d i e s  a l s o found t h a t c o n t r o l l i n g f o r  i n t e l l i g e n c e had t h e e f f e c t o f r e d u c i n g the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n between a u d i t o r y  v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n and comprehension, w h i l e t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e  of t h e c o r r e l a t i o n between i n t e g r a t i o n and word r e c o g n i t i o n  remained h i g h  (Beery, 1967; Jones, 1970; Kahn & B i r c h , 1968; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick e t a l . , 1967; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966).  Bryden (1972) found  o v e r a l l matching scores of low readers s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d and  almost no c o r r e l a t i o n f o r h i g h r e a d e r s .  w i t h I.Q.  R e p r e s e n t i n g r e a d i n g and matching  by one composite s c o r e o b v i o u s l y l e a d s t o l o s s o f d e s c r i p t i v e  detail.  It  must be remembered t h a t B r y d e n s s u b j e c t s were c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r i n mean 1  I.Q.  I t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g and i n t e l l i g e n c e  f o r d i f f e r e n t r e a d i n g a b i l i t y l e v e l s i s a v e r y complex one, and by c o n t r i b u t i n g  factors  i n an i n t e r a c t i v e  influenced  fashion.  T h i s complex r e l a t i o n s h i p i s even more e v i d e n t when the- s e p a r a t e t a s k s  88  are c o r r e l a t e d w i t h I.Q. data.  None of the reviewed  studies reported  these  There were sex d i f f e r e n c e s as w e l l as r e a d i n g l e v e l d i f f e r e n c e s i n  the p a t t e r n s o f c o r r e l a t i o n s i n the p r e s e n t s t u d y . s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h I.Q. h i g h boys.  None o f the t a s k s  was  f o r low r e a d i n g g i r l s and o n l y one  for  On seven of the n i n e t a s k s low r e a d i n g boys and h i g h g i r l s  the h i g h e s t c o r r e l a t i o n s , a number o f which were s i g n i f i c a n t and  had  near  s i g n i f i c a n t , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t the a b i l i t i e s of these groups were more similar.  In a d d i t i o n , o b s e r v a t i o n of the r e a d i n g group p r o f i l e s on  the  matching t a s k s shows t h a t the h i g h g i r l s ' p r o f i l e i s more s i m i l a r to the boys than the h i g h boys.  I n v i e w of these f a c t s and  s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r comprehension s c o r e s , i t may r e a d e r s and p r o c e s s , and  low  the h i g h boys'  be t h a t a b l e  girl  low r e a d e r s a r e more t i e d t o p e r c e p t u a l a s p e c t s of the r e a d i n g t o v i s u a l s p a t i a l r a t h e r than v i s u a l t e m p o r a l a s p e c t s ,  evidenced by the h i g h e r r o r r a t e s on t a s k s w i t h VT  as  elements.  I t i s o f i n t e r e s t t h a t - t h o s e m a t c h i n g t a s k s which were s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h b o t h I.Q.  and r e a d i n g f o r h i g h r e a d e r s i n c l u d e the AT-AT  t a s k and the two t a s k s r e q u i r i n g s p a t i a l - t e m p o r a l s h i f t s w i t h i n v i s i o n (VT-VS and VS-VT).  These t a s k s are t h r e e o f the f o u r on w h i c h Bryden  (1972) found s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between good and poor r e a d e r s . low r e a d e r s the o n l y t a s k s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h I.Q. r e a d i n g measures was  and  For  both  AT-VS, a double i n t e g r a t i o n t a s k w h i c h seems t o have  importance i n d i s c r i m i n a t i n g between good and poor r e a d e r s . r e l a t i o n s h i p s support .the n o t i o n t h a t poorer r e a d e r s f i n d  These c l o s e temporal  p r o c e s s i n g e a s i e r i n the a u d i t o r y than the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y and a r e most at ease w i t h v i s u a l s p a t i a l  stimuli.  The p r e s e n t f i n d i n g s suggest t h a t a f u r t h e r a r e a of s t u d y c o u l d be i n examining more c l o s e l y , the three-way r e l a t i o n s h i p s u s i n g sub-components o f i n t e l l i g e n c e and more v a r i e d r e a d i n g measures, w h i l e r e t a i n i n g the n i n e  89  integration tasks.  U s i n g s u b - t e s t s o f the Wechsler I n t e l l i g e n c e S c a l e f o r  C h i l d r e n or one of the r e - c a t e g o r i z a t i o n s o f s u b - t e s t s would be a possibility.  I n p a r t i c u l a r the apparent s i m i l a r i t y between the  profiles  o f low r e a d i n g boys and h i g h g i r l s might be f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e d .  Comparison  of low, medium and h i g h i n t e l l i g e n c e l e v e l s i n r e l a t i o n t o m a t c h i n g  and  r e a d i n g would a l s o be v a l u a b l e .  Sex D i f f e r e n c e s i n Reading and M o d a l i t y  Matching  From the f o r e g o i n g d i s c u s s i o n t h e r e have been i n d i c a t i o n s o f  sex  d i f f e r e n c e s i n some a s p e c t s o f m o d a l i t y m a t c h i n g and r e a d i n g l e v e l . not a s i m p l e m a t t e r  to e x p l a i n the absence of sex d i f f e r e n c e i n r e a d i n g f o r  the grade t h r e e p o p u l a t i o n , though a s i m i l a r t r e n d was (1971). reading  It is  found by  Reilly  Of the major e x p l a n a t i o n s u s u a l l y g i v e n f o r sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n (Dwyer, 1973), namely d i f f e r e n t i a l m a t u r a t i o n , r e a d e r  n e g a t i v e treatment  content,  o f boys by female t e a c h e r s or c u l t u r a l e x p e c t a t i o n s f o r  the male r o l e , none appears to be i s o l a b l e i n t h i s i n s t a n c e .  I t may  be  t h a t a h i g h q u a l i t y of r e a d i n g i n s t r u c t i o n i n a compact community d e a l s w i t h the l a t t e r t h r e e e x p l a n a t i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y i f c u l t u r a l l y based i n f l u e n c e s a r e most i m p o r t a n t , as Dwyer (1973) and Johnson (1973) suggest. Bentzen (1963) suggested  t h a t sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a d i n g r e s u l t from  the i n t e r a c t i o n of s t r e s s from c u l t u r a l e x p e c t a t i o n s and  the m a t u r a t i o n a l  development of the r e a d e r .  I f i n f a c t these s t r e s s e s are minimized  c h i l d r e n o f t h i s s t u d y , and  i f as B u k t e n i c a  (1970) proposes,  p e r c e p t u a l development has been a c h i e v e d by 8 y e a r s of age, c o u l d indeed account f o r the absence of any in  f o r the  the o p t i m a l these f a c t o r s  s i g n i f i c a n t sex d i f f e r e n c e s  reading. The  i n t e r a c t i o n of v a r i a b l e s , p r e v i o u s l y mentioned, does seem to a p p l y  90  in the matter of sex differences observed  i n the matching task performance.  Although no main effect was found for reading nor any interaction of sex and reading l e v e l , s i g n i f i c a n t s p e c i f i c differences d i d occur at c e r t a i n points.  Both Jorgensen and Hyde (1974) and R e i l l y (1971) suggested  that  sensory integration and reading achievement are related i n a complex manner involving sex differences.  From the performance on the matching tasks by  the four groups i t i s clear that g i r l s appear to handle VT s t i m u l i less easily than boys when there i s no VS element involved i n the match, i . e . when the integrations are either intramodal or cross-modal within the temporal dimension.  Expressed  i n another way,  and taking into account the  s i g n i f i c a n t interaction of comparison stimulus and sex, g i r l s have more difficulty  i n matching when the second portion of the match i s v i s u a l and  temporal.  When the VS element i s matched with VT s t i m u l i sex differences  drop p r a c t i c a l l y to zero. The temporal intramodal match within audition (AT-AT) showed no difference between high boys and g i r l s but a considerable difference for low readers.  While this could represent an intramodal auditory d e f i c i t ,  the general d i f f i c u l t y of AT-AT tasks f o r a l l groups, and the patterns of scores involving the auditory element in cross-modal matches for both reading l e v e l s , suggest  that this i s not the case.  The p r a c t i c a l significance  for reading competence of the g i r l s ' VT weakness i s not r e a d i l y apparent since boys and g i r l s within reading l e v e l s read equally w e l l .  Similarly,  for low readers, the p r a c t i c a l significance of a weakness i n AT-AT integration for g i r l s i s not obvious.  These g i r l s may  attentive to auditory stimuli of this nature.  simply be less  On the other hand i t may  r e f l e c t once more the complex interaction of integration a b i l i t i e s , i n t e l l i g e n c e and reading, as w e l l as the nature of the task.  sex,  91  The other aspect of sex difference of note was f o r integrations involving VS elements, e s p e c i a l l y for low boys on VS-AT, which i s a double integration task.  A weakness on this task may  be a p e c u l i a r i t y of this  group of subjects since data from two other studies show the VS-AT task to be less d i f f i c u l t than the VS-VT task. opposite trend.  Low boys here showed the  While low g i r l s scored better than high g i r l s on the VS-VS  task and low boys scored not much worse than high g i r l s , this r e l a t i v e strength for low readers does not appear to be related to better reading performance.  On the contrary i t appears from parts of the data analysis  that poorer readers may  over-dwell on VS aspects of stimulus input to the  detriment of reading performance - an overcompensation.  While this feature  could be interpreted as evidence of modal s p e c i f i c i t y i t could equally be a developed  incompetence in the over-use of the s p a t i a l adeptness of the  v i s u a l modality.  Modality Matching and Reading E a r l i e r studies used a variety of methods, tasks, numbers and types of items, ages, and sex groupings.  Although  the majority of studies found a  s i g n i f i c a n t relationship between sensory integration and reading, some studies questioned the existence of such a relationship.  Of the reviewed  studies which included a l l nine combinations of v i s u a l s p a t i a l , v i s u a l temporal and auditory temporal elements of sensory integration, only one related intramodal and cross-modal a b i l i t i e s  to reading a b i l i t i e s .  In that  study Bryden (1972) did find a s i g n i f i c a n t main effect for reading with good readers superior on a l l tasks.  Although  superior on a l l tasks, only  on the tasks AT-AT, VT-AT, VT-VS, and VS-VT were good readers s i g n i f i c a n t l y superior.  In the present study the good readers were s i g n i f i c a n t l y  92  superior on a l l tasks except VS-VS, i n a l l cases the p r o b a b i l i t y being less than  .001.  Bryden (1972) suggested a non l i n e a r relationship between matching  and  reading, with the c o r r e l a t i o n dropping to zero once a moderate l e v e l of reading was achieved.  It appears that Bryden's view i s too simple.  It  did not take into account the elements of the integration tasks, p a r t i c u l a r l y the s p a t i a l and temporal dimensions, nor did i t take into account more s p e c i f i c sex differences.  The necessary minimal l e v e l f o r adequate  reading performance may vary with d i f f e r e n t combinations of the contributory factors. The plotted patterns of matching scores f o r Bryden (1972) and the present study bear some resemblance but they also diverge at certain points. Bryden's method of data analysis did not include a breakdown into standard and comparison  elements which meant that the interaction of these elements  with reading could not be found. and of above average i n t e l l i g e n c e .  In addition, Bryden's subjects were few The items used were fewer and simpler  than i n the present study, which made for much smaller differences i n task error scores.  The VS-VS task showed evidence of a c e i l i n g effect with a  mean error rate of 0.5 for good readers.  In addition, by using randomly  mixed matching tasks within testing sessions i t i s l i k e l y that poor readers were adversely affected by their known d i f f i c u l t y with intersensory perceptual s h i f t s in cross-modal integrations (Derevensky, Thus, i n the Bryden (1972) study, while performance  1978).  on AT-AT, AT-VT,  VT-VS, VS-AT, VS-VT and VS-VS are comparable i n d i f f i c u l t y trend to the present study, the trends of scores on the two purely temporal tasks with VT standard s t i m u l i show some differences.  The d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l of these  93  t a s k s d i d not show a marked i n c r e a s e i n e r r o r s i n the Bryden s t u d y compared to the p r e s e n t  study.  Bryden's d a t a showed d e c r e a s i n g  as  error  r a t e s f o r these t a s k s except f o r poor r e a d e r s on the VT-AT t a s k w h i c h had s l i g h t l y higher error rate.  a  S i m i l a r l y , the good r e a d e r s ' e r r o r r a t e on  the AT-VS t a s k does not drop i n the Bryden s t u d y ,  though i t d i d f o r  Bryden's poor r e a d e r s and d i d so c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y f o r a l l groups i n the present The  study. s t u d i e s by S t e r r i t t et a l . (1971) and Rudnick et a l . (1972) p r o v i d e  f u r t h e r comparisons though they used younger, b l a c k and c h i c a n o a l l of whom d i d a l l t a s k s . They g e n e r a l l y supported  c h i l d r e n , not  T h e i r s t u d i e s were not a p p l i e d to r e a d i n g .  the i n c r e a s i n g and h i g h e r r o r r a t e f o r the  temporal t a s k s w i t h VT s t a n d a r d s .  two  They a l s o showed the s t e p i n the p r o f i l e  of t a s k s c o r e s where a lower e r r o r r a t e f o r the VS-AT t a s k i s f o l l o w e d by i n c r e a s e d e r r o r s on the VS-VT t a s k .  Seven out o f e i g h t groups p l o t t e d ,  showed t h i s f e a t u r e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t s p a t i a l to t e m p o r a l i n t e g r a t i o n s w i t h i n v i s i o n a r e more d i f f i c u l t than s p a t i a l t o t e m p o r a l i n t e g r a t i o n s w h i c h a l s o i n v o l v e a s h i f t from v i s u a l t o a u d i t o r y . may  Bryden's d i f f e r e n t  results  r e f l e c t h i g h e r i n t e l l i g e n c e of s u b j e c t s , e a s i e r t a s k s or the d i f f e r e n t  method of p r e s e n t a t i o n of the t a s k s .  G i v e n these d i f f e r e n c e s , i t would  appear t h a t the p r e s e n t study p r e s e n t s a more r e a l i s t i c p i c t u r e of d i f f i c u l t y o f the p u r e l y temporal t a s k s w i t h VT s t a n d a r d s  the  than does the  Bryden s t u d y .  S t i m u l u s Elements and M a t c h i n g Task Performance The n a t u r e o f the i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s would appear to be of key f o r sensory  importance  i n t e g r a t i o n . O'Connor and H e r m e l i n (1972) demonstrated t h a t  the m o d a l i t y o f i n p u t was  a determining  f a c t o r i n whether i n f o r m a t i o n  was  94  organized that  or  encoded  spatial  information  have a v i s u a l standard error  spatial  stimulus  scores  of  scores  for  visual  temporal  modality,  with  that  matching  task.  in  both  with  slight  AT  stimuli  half  the  in  high  of  temporal readers  modality. i n p u t may  was  encoding  the  nature  of  more a b l e  initial  t a s k s were e a s i e r and  VT  of  initial  High g i r l s than  temporal matching  with  task  stimuli  facility  VT  tasks  with  with  VS  VT  readers  calls  error  for visual  input  or  spatially.  in  temporal more  the processing  difficulty T h e r e was  easier  W i t h AT  that  visual  stimuli  t o be  lower  of  the  had  for  higher  i n the  readers.  stimuli.  than  standards  low  question  t h e much  combined w i t h  boys were e q u a l l y a b l e a t  were s t i l l  than  to  temporally  the  no  that poor  the modality  or  by  largely  temporal  than  be  main e f f e c t  H o w e v e r , when t h e  auditory modalities.  AT  due  stimuli,  initial  temporal  and  significant  i s encoded  reading  factor  dimensions  rather  showed  than  a  with  comparison  comparisons  and  comparisons were  predisposed  stimulus  is visual  and  processing  temporal, tendency  the than  and  tasks  half  were  approximately  temporally.  the  reader good  on  information  modality  information  poor  loaded  the  spatial  auditory modalities,  temporal  the v i s u a l  to p r o c e s s i n g information  that  visual  at processing  i t seems t h a t w h i l e  for processing  spatial  analyses  more v e r s a t i l e  Thus be  the  capacity  the  initial  can  difficulty.  Results and  study  There  visually  information  for purely  stimuli  more d i f f i c u l t . equal  the  but  tendency  very  t a s k demand r a t h e r  High and  organized  standards.  i s invoked  stimuli  initial  VT  spatial  visual  VT  present VS  temporally.  The  performance with  i t i s the  modality  strength.  tasks with  tasks  i t i s the  i s best  i n the  determines whether Thus  s p a t i a l l y or  as  with  i n the  visual  the m o d a l i t y  spatially,  i t has  a  of strong  H o w e v e r when t h e  initial  seems m o r e b o u n d  by  reader.  95  Bryden (1972) suggested t h a t an i n i t i a l VS s t i m u l u s gave h i g h e r m a t c h i n g s c o r e s , not s i m p l y because they a r e e a s i e r to match, but because they e a s i e r to remember or to o r g a n i z e c o n c e p t u a l l y .  Likewise, i n i t i a l  are  temporal  s t i m u l i ( e s p e c i a l l y VT) gave lower matching s c o r e s because t e m p o r a l o r g a n i z a t i o n was more d i f f i c u l t and temporal o r g a n i z a t i o n .  the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y l e s s adept a t  I t seems f a i r to add t h a t t h i s r e f l e c t s the  of t e m p o r a l i t y r a t h e r than a m o d a l i t y d e f i c i t , and  nature  that f a c i l i t y f o r appropri-  a t e use of t h e s e two c a p a c i t i e s o f the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y , as r e q u i r e d by  the  t a s k , a l s o c o n t r i b u t e s t o b e t t e r m a t c h i n g performance. Thus p a r t of the problem of r e l a t i v e t a s k performance i s bound up i n the m o d a l i t y of i n p u t , p a r t i n the s p a t i a l o r t e m p o r a l d i m e n s i o n i n w h i c h the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y i s o p e r a t i n g , as s e t by the i n i t i a l s t i m u l i , and p a r t i n these same f a c t o r s f o r the comparison s t i m u l i .  I f f o r a l l the s t u d i e s  u s i n g n i n e t a s k s , the t a s k s a r e g i v e n r a n k o r d e r of d i f f i c u l t y ,  the  f o l l o w i n g o r d e r i s found.  first  VS-VS then VS-AT and remaining  E a s i e s t a r e those w i t h VS s t a n d a r d s ,  then VS-VT.  Next and e q u a l i n d i f f i c u l t y  t a s k s w i t h VS comparisons, AT-VS and VT-VS.  d i f f i c u l t a r e AT-AT and  then AT-VT, two  modal VT comparison b e i n g more d i f f i c u l t  t a s k s w i t h AT  are the  two  The n e x t two most standards,  the c r o s s -  than the i n t r a m o d a l match.  Next  most d i f f i c u l t i s VT-VT, an i n t r a m o d a l match w i t h i n the t e m p o r a l d i m e n s i o n , and most d i f f i c u l t  i s the cross-modal match from v i s u a l to a u d i t o r y w i t h i n  the t e m p o r a l d i m e n s i o n , VT-AT. Thus the two  i n t r a m o d a l matches w i t h i n v i s i o n s t a n d almost a t t h e  extremes of d i f f i c u l t y ,  r e p r e s e n t i n g a s p a t i a l - t e m p o r a l dichotomy.  two  The  f i r s t and t h i r d most d i f f i c u l t t a s k s a r e c r o s s - m o d a l matches w i t h i n the t e m p o r a l d i m e n s i o n , w i t h VT standards  more d i f f i c u l t  than AT.  The  three  96  most d i f f i c u l t  tasks are integrations within the temporal dimension.  requiring two  integrations f a l l i n the group of easier tasks with VS  standards being easier than AT standards.  Tasks  These composite r e s u l t s contra-  d i c t or q u a l i f y Bryden's (1972) findings that cross-modal s h i f t s are more d i f f i c u l t , and that spatial-temporal integrations within v i s i o n are more d i f f i c u l t than cross-modal integrations within the temporal dimension. Cross-modal s h i f t s are more d i f f i c u l t only for the purely temporal tasks. Thereafter they are of equivalent d i f f i c u l t y or the intramodal matches are more d i f f i c u l t .  Conversely  to Bryden's findings, spatial-temporal  s h i f t s within v i s i o n are easier than cross-modal integrations. findings lend support  The  to the Kuhlman and Wolking (1972) view that cross-  modal and intramodal matches are similar i n d i f f i c u l t y i f both begin  with  the same modality element. These conclusions were supported and further q u a l i f i e d by the paifwise comparisons made to examine the assumptions of the modal-specific view of sensory functioning.  Friedes (1974) reinterpreted the modal-specific  view i n terms of information complexity.  The modal-specific view must be  q u a l i f i e d also i n terms of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the processor.  Processing  information  temporal information i n the v i s u a l modality  only s i g n i f i c a n t l y more d i f f i c u l t for poorer readers. modal integration i n the temporal dimension was d i f f i c u l t f o r low readers.  S i m i l a r l y cross-  only s i g n i f i c a n t l y more  Other cross-modal matches were i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y  more or less d i f f i c u l t than intramodal matches.  Thus, there was  support for the view that cross-modal integration i s a higher process of sensory integration. reading.groups added support  was  no  order  Results of the factor analyses f o r both  to this r e f u t a t i o n .  It appears also that Friedes* (1974) reinterpretation with regard to  97  stimulus complexity also needs further q u a l i f i c a t i o n .  Friedes concluded  that the modality s p e c i f i c view held for the processing of complex pattern information.  However i f the stimulus patterns of the present study are  regarded as complex, and i f the modality s p e c i f i c view only appears to hold true f o r low readers, then Friedes' view needs modification since good readers process temporal information e f f e c t i v e l y i n the v i s u a l modality.  A l t e r n a t i v e l y , i f Friedes' conclusion that simple tasks c a l l f o r  non-modal processing and complex tasks c a l l for modality s p e c i f i c processing,  there could be a switch of processing style c a l l e d f o r i n the middle  of a test where item complexity progressed from simple to complex. readers may  begin with one perceptual set, e.g. s p a t i a l , and when complex  patterns c a l l for temporal processing, they may switch.  have d i f f i c u l t y making the  This would correspond with poor readers' d i f f i c u l t y with i n t e r -  sensory perceptual s h i f t s . why  Poorer  It would also be a p l a u s i b l e explanation of  poor readers often are good at decoding  i n i t i a l word parts (spatial)  but have d i f f i c u l t y with mid and end word parts (temporal). Thus the d i r e c t i o n of focus indicated by t h i s study i s more to the processing of information as determined by the adeptness of the input modality, i n inter-action with the s p a t i a l and temporal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  the input stimuli which set the requirements  of the task.  The explora-  tory factor analyses investigated the cognitive processing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of good and poor readers.  The results indicated that f o r good readers,  temporal stimulus input i s processed s i m i l a r l y by v i s u a l or auditory modalities depending on the task requirements.  Poorer readers on the  other hand appear to demonstrate lack of adeptness, or confusion i n the. processing of temporal information where the v i s u a l modality i s involved. The introductory items of each of the matching tasks established the  98  t a s k r e q u i r e m e n t s i n terms of v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and integration.  temporal  The o r d e r o f p r e s e n t a t i o n of the s t i m u l u s elements  the type o f i n t e g r a t i o n or p r o c e s s i n g r e q u i r e d .  determined  Then the developed  adept-  ness of the i n p u t m o d a l i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l p r o c e s s o r d e t e r m i n e d how the t a s k was performed.  well  From the f a c t o r a n a l y s e s and the p a i r w i s e c o m p a r i -  sons, p o o r e r r e a d e r s appeared  t o be l e s s adept a t p r o c e s s i n g t e m p o r a l  i n f o r m a t i o n i n the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the absence of a VS t a s k element.  P o o r e r r e a d e r s appeared  f a c i l i t y o f the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y .  to be bound by the s p a t i a l  encoding  Not o n l y d i d t h i s f a c i l i t y appear to o v e r -  r i d e t e m p o r a l p r o c e s s i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s i n terms o f m o d a l i t y f u n c t i o n as i n d i c a t e d by the i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s , but a l s o i t appeared  to o v e r - r i d e the  temporal p r o c e s s i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e t a s k i t s e l f , by over-emphasis s p a t i a l a s p e c t s of the t a s k , even i f they o c c u r r e d as the comparison In  on stimuli.  the f a c t o r a n a l y s i s f o r l o w r e a d e r s , t h e two t a s k s w i t h t e m p o r a l s t a n d a r d s  which l o a d e d the s p a t i a l f a c t o r were those w i t h VS  comparisons.  A t t e n t i o n i s thus drawn t o the l i n k between t e m p o r a l and  spatial  s t i m u l u s elements and t h e i r r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n i n the matching t a s k s .  The  s t r o n g main e f f e c t f o r the s t a n d a r d s t i m u l u s was due to the combined i n f l u e n c e o f the VT and VS elements. s t i m u l i was  The main e f f e c t f o r the  due s o l e l y to the i n f l u e n c e of the VS element.  seems to be t h a t t h e VT o f s e q u e n t i a l element as an i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s i n s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n .  comparison  The  i s of p a r t i c u l a r  implication influence  Differential abilities  at  p r o c e s s i n g VT s t i m u l i d i s t i n g u i s h between good and poor r e a d e r s whereas ability  a t p r o c e s s i n g VS s t i m u l i does n o t .  M a t c h i n g t a s k s which c a l l e d f o r  s p a t i a l and temporal i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h i n v i s i o n were s i g n i f i c a n t l y  correlated  w i t h r e a d i n g measures f o r h i g h r e a d e r s , e s p e c i a l l y f o r word r e c o g n i t i o n . For low r e a d e r s i t was  the VS-VS t a s k t h a t was  significantly  correlated  99  with word recognition.  The implication i s that temporal-spatial s h i f t s  within the v i s u a l modality are p a r t i c u l a r l y c a l l e d f o r i n the reading process, and that more able readers demonstrate a greater f a c i l i t y i n making those s h i f t s , e s p e c i a l l y in word recognition.  The fact that AT-AT  integration and vocabulary were highly correlated for high readers suggests that auditory attention and sequencing are important  for word recognition,  and tends to support the view that temporal rather than s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s are more closely associated with adequacy at decoding. who  Poorer readers,  have a s p a t i a l strength, are weak at decoding. O'Connor and Hermelin (1972) highlighted the capacity of the input  modality to induce a temporal or s p a t i a l set for the processing of the information.  It would seem that for poorer readers, when the input modality  i s v i s u a l but the task requirement set by the standard stimulus i s temporal processing, an inappropriate set for s p a t i a l encoding may Friedes' (1974) terminology,  occur.  In  information input for the less adept temporal  aspect of v i s u a l processing i s translated into the code of the most adept s p a t i a l aspect of the v i s u a l modality. "compensatory enhancement"  This could well be classed as a  (Friedes, 1974,  p";.285) of the s p a t i a l processing  strength of the v i s u a l modality for poorer readers.  This may  also be the  explanation why v i s u a l to auditory switches for poorer readers are more d i f f i c u l t than auditory to v i s u a l , as found in this study and i n other studies (Estes & Huizinga, 1974;  Vande Voort, Senf & Benton, 1972).  This VS processing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of poorer readers may an effect which was evident in the item analysis data.  contribute to  That part of the  most discriminating items where the choice point (and thus the error point in matching) occurred, was predominantly at the middle and end of the stimulus patterns.  This demonstrated a type of recency effect in the  100  c o n c e n t r a t i o n of e r r o r s .  A v i s u a l - s p a t i a l strength favours  primacy  ( F r i e d e s , 1974).  Very few o f the i t e m s were d i s c r i m i n a t i n g where the p o i n t  o f d i f f e r e n c e was  a t the b e g i n n i n g  of the s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s .  tendency c o u l d be e x p l o r e d f u r t h e r by f u t u r e s t u d i e s .  This  A f u r t h e r area  of  r e s e a r c h c o u l d a l s o be the r e l a t i n g o f modal p r e f e r e n c e and o t h e r measures of m o d a l i t y s t r e n g t h to performance of good and poor r e a d e r s on i n t e g r a t i o n tasks. Emphasis on the p r o c e s s i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the i n d i v i d u a l  reader  i n e v i t a b l y t a k e s one f u r t h e r away from the symptoms towards the e t i o l o g y . There i s a t e m p t a t i o n  to v i e w the d i s c u s s e d f i n d i n g s i n the l i g h t o f  n e u r o p s y c h o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e such as t h a t d e a l i n g w i t h f u n c t i o n of the b r a i n (Dimond & Beaumont, 1974; p a r t i c u l a r l y hemispheric or i n simultaneous  hemispheric  Kimura, 1963;  M i l n e r , 1971),  i n v o l v e m e n t i n v e r b a l and v i s u o - s p a t i a l f u n c t i o n  and s u c c e s s i v e p r o c e s s i n g  (Cohen, 1973).  Butters  Brody (1968) were among the few r e s e a r c h e r s to r e l a t e s p e c i f i c  and  cortical  l e s i o n s to modality matching, f i n d i n g that cross-modal matching l o s s  was  p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l a t e d to the dominant p a r i e t a l l o b e , w h i l e f r o n t a l - t e m p o r a l l e s i o n s d i d n o t i m p a i r i n t r a m o d a l or cross-modal m a t c h i n g .  Even w i t h  s p e c i f i c n e u r o l o g i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n , a p p l i c a t i o n of f i n d i n g s i s l i m i t e d . Without s p e c i f i c n e u r o l o g i c a l data on the s u b j e c t s t h i s would be a f u t i l e exercise. I n compromise t h e r e does seem to be a j u s t i f i c a t i o n however f o r v i e w i n g the d i s c u s s i o n i n the l i g h t o f t h e o r e t i c a l v i e w s o f those w o r k i n g i n the f i e l d o f b r a i n s c i e n c e and b r a i n - b e h a v i o u r t o m o d a l - s p e c i f i c i t y and  r e l a t i o n s h i p s which a r e p e r t i n e n t  i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g and w h i c h a r e a p p l i c a b l e to  differences i n reading a b i l i t y .  The  to be most r e l e v a n t i n t h i s r e g a r d .  t h e o r i e s of L u r i a (1966, 1973) Working from s t u d i e s o f  appear  cortical  101  lesions, Luria rejects both the idea of the undifferentiated functioning of the brain and that of the narrow l o c a l i z a t i o n of function.  He postulates  three basic co-operating zones of the brain, each with d i f f e r e n t c o r t i c a l function and relationship to sensory modalities.  The three zones are  organized on a h i e r a r c h i c a l basis in terms of neural development and diminishing modal s p e c i f i c t y .  The primary areas of the upper brain stem and  r e t i c u l a r formation are involved with arousal, motivation, information reception and analysis.  They are most modality s p e c i f i c .  The  secondary  areas ( o c c i p i t a l , p a r i e t a l and temporal regions) subserve sensory input, v i s u a l and auditory analysis and coding and storage of information, being highly modality s p e c i f i c .  The t e r t i a r y block includes the large area of the  f r o n t a l lobes subserving the most complex behaviours, the function being non-modality  specific.  A l l three of the areas i d e n t i f i e d by Luria work together to subserve perception and the development of a b i l i t i e s r e s u l t i n g from educational experiences.  Thus poor reading performance and sensory integration  perform-  ance which i s more tied to modality s p e c i f i c s can be seen i n the developmental hierarchy put forward.  Whether or not i t i s neurological impairment,  a maturational lag, or inadequate  learning experience which i s responsible  for the poorer performance i s not so relevant as the degree of functioning developed.  It would be wrong to consider a l l poor readers with  inadequacies as having dominant p a r i e t a l lobe weaknesses.  cross-modal  It seems more  acceptable to view an inadequacy of sensory integration by poorer readers as placing them somewhere on a continuum of developed tion processing.  expertise i n informa-  It i s on the establishing of this status that remediation  can be based. Closely related to the modality matching approach and a r i s i n g out of the  102  work of Luria i s the approach of simultaneous and successive syntheses in information processing.  Simultaneous processing involves integration of  sensory stimuli into e s s e n t i a l l y spatial groupings, secondary area of the cortex. r e l a t i o n a l concepts.  being subserved by the  This processing deals with global and  Simultaneous synthesis i s also involved i n comparative,  s p a t i a l and l o g i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p concepts as expressed & Das,  1977).  i n language (Cummins  Successive processing, linked to the t e r t i a r y area of the  cortex, subserves integration of s t i m u l i into temporal series as i n automatic sequential s k i l l s .  Studies using the simultaneous and  successive  syntheses paradigm in r e l a t i o n to reading, and using a v a r i e t y of meaningful content and memory tasks, suggest that among c h i l d r e n who  are l i k e l y to  experience d i f f i c u l t y i n reading, successive processing i s highly related to reading a b i l i t y , while better reading i s more related to simultaneous processing (Cummins & Das,  1977;  Doehring, 1968).  Kirby and Das  the emphasis that both forms of processing were important  (1977) added  for superior per-  formance on complex tasks such as reading. In summarizing a great deal of research on the cognitive functioning of disabled readers, Kirby and Das  (1977) present a case f o r the a p p l i c a -  b i l i t y of simultaneous and successive processing to research in reading difficulties.  Since VS s t i m u l i i n matching tasks are simultaneous i n  presentation, while a l l temporal stimuli are successive, there i s a clear overlap between these two approaches.  In view of (a) the 25-study review  by Rugel (1974) which found that disabled readers are strong in v i s u a l spatial s k i l l s ,  (b) the heavy emphasis on the VS element which i s a  feature of poor readers' matching task performance i n the present  study,  (c) the modality-specific nature of the secondary zone function which subserves  simulteaneous synthesis and v i s u o - s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , the value  103  of these approaches well established.  to the study of reading d i f f i c u l t i e s appears to be Kirby and Das  (1977) concuded that " i t i s only on the  basis of this type of research into the underlying processing d e f i c i t s of disabled readers that rationally-based remediation procedures can be implemented" (p. 569).  Implications for Reading Several studies drew attention to the d i f f i c u l t y of temporal integrations in the v i s u a l modality.  The present study indicated c l e a r l y that poorer  readers are s i g n i f i c a n t l y less able at such integrations than good readers. The spatial-temporal integration a b i l i t i e s of poorer readers are c l e a r l y impaired (Doehring, 1968; Leong, Note 1; Rugel, 1974).  What are the  implications of these findings on modality integration for remediation? While t h i s study was not intended to extend into program development i t would be hoped that i t has c l a r i f i e d some of the issues in the relationship of sensory integration to reading.  Can this relationship be further  expressed in terms of d i r e c t .remedial principles? Reading c l e a r l y involves a mixture of sensory integrations.  Spatially  perceived units (whole or part words or phrases) are integrated with other s p a t i a l l y organized units i n a sequential (visual and temporal) manner. Spatially and temporally perceived (visual) u n i t s are also integrated with phonic or phonetic units as graphic symbols become associated with oral-auditory vocabulary. integrations i s  Thus f l e x i b i l i t y i n the f u l l variety of sensory  c a l l e d - f o r in p r o f i c i e n t reading.  This f l e x i b i l i t y would  also extend to s e l e c t i v e use of appropriate integrations as the requirements of the task change.  In Friedes' (1974) terms this could be expressed as  the u t i l i z a t i o n of the most adept aspect of modality function i n terms of  104  the complexity of the information processing required by the task.  It  seems clear that processing needs change as reading s k i l l s develop (Doehring,  1976), and also clear that good readers use both the global  VS and sequential VT adeptness of the v i s u a l modality more f l e x i b l y and appropriately (Gibson, 1970).  In learning or decoding stages, the  integration demands of the v i s u a l modality could c a l l upon i t s temporal adeptness more heavily.  As words become known or as larger units are  synthesized more readily, a more automatic, global, v i s u a l s p a t i a l adeptness in integration would be more appropriate. Looking at the processing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of good readers i t i s apparent that they have strong VS a b i l i t i e s .  They are also able to integrate  v i s u a l temporal and auditory temporal information equally well as c a l l e d for by the stage of d i f f i c u l t y of the task.  VT integrations are s t i l l  more d i f f i c u l t but when they are c a l l e d - f o r t h i s adeptness i s brought to bear on the task.  Poorer readers on the other hand appear to be more bound  by the VS adeptness of the v i s u a l modality and process information i n appropriately by over-use or over-compensation i n this aspect of modal function, being locked into modal-specific aspects of c o r t i c a l functioning. This could be explained i n terms of neurological damage or slower matura t i o n a l development.  It could be due to inadequate experience  i n language,  in perceptual motor s k i l l s or i n general perceptual organization which i s demanding of sequential r e l a t i n g and processing of information. Whatever the explanation, the child's needs would be the same - planned, progressive and broadly based r i c h experience and reading  activities.  i n developmental language  This would not mean perceptual training exercises  such as matching patterns of l i g h t flashes, beeps and dots, but perceptual training that i s i n t r i n s i c to oral and written language and to the teaching  105  of reading and writing, as sequential steps within these a c t i v i t i e s . If the integration weaknesses of poor readers, highlighted by the findings of this study, are translated into enrichment practices, some examples could include judging the equivalence or difference of written and spoken, s p a t i a l l y and temporally presented words and word elements. Using timed presentation techniques, l e t t e r s or s y l l a b l e s could be matched and subsequently pronounced.  This would u t i l i z e VS s k i l l s , observing  d i s t i n c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . e t c . , but c a l l i n g f o r integration, and adding sound association (cross-modal integration) to the s p a t i a l integration.  Further stages would c a l l f o r matching larger units of whole words  or phrases, followed by pronunciation. In p a r a l l e l could be presentation of sequences of s y l l a b l e s , increasing i n number and complexity, f i r s t c a l l i n g for matching and then blending. Again i n p a r a l l e l could be the cross-modal matching of v i s u a l elements (syllables, words) both s p a t i a l l y and sequentially with heard s y l l a b l e s or words, c a l l i n g f o r simple matching and then v o c a l i z i n g .  S i m i l a r l y the  auditory elements could precede the v i s u a l - s p a t i a l and visual-sequential elements or be followed by matching auditory elements.  Part of the process  could require a n t i c i p a t i o n or v i s u a l i z a t i o n of what the equivalent match would be, followed by actual presentation of the comparison stimulus.  These  practices would lead naturally to writing and s p e l l i n g as the standard or comparison part of the matching process.  They would be aimed at increasing  the f l e x i b i l i t y of the c h i l d at handling both intramodal and aspects of integration.  inter-modal  For remediating more basic d i f f i c u l t i e s the same  principles could be used with p i c t o r i a l or alphabetic materials as s t i m u l i to be matched. The practices would be aimed at f a c i l i t a t i n g and developing the neuronal  106  connections and  to g r a d u a l l y d e c r e a s e i n a p p r o p r i a t e m o d a l - s p e c i f i c f u n c t i o n i n g  to i n c r e a s e the a b i l i t y of v i s i o n t o h a n d l e b o t h s p a t i a l and  stimuli.  temporal  T h i s would be i n the c o n t e x t of m e a n i n g f u l p i c t o r i a l , o r a l  verbal materials.  and  Bakker's w r i t i n g (1967) would s u p p o r t the naming  and  r e t e n t i o n of t e m p o r a l sequences as a t r a i n i n g program f o r c h i l d r e n w i t h reading d i f f i c u l t i e s .  I t i s a s a l u t o r y reminder t h a t c h i l d r e n r a t e d  low  i n r e a d i n g and p e r c e p t i o n made s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r g a i n s i n word r e c o g n i t i o n a f t e r l i s t e n i n g to taped s t o r i e s and d i s c u s s i n g them, than d i d c h i l d r e n who  received s p e c i f i c t r a i n i n g i n v i s u a l perception using non-verbal  materials  (Buckland  & Balow, 1973).  I t seems c l e a r t h a t poor r e a d e r s  i n c l u d e those who  temporal or v i s u a l s p a t i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s , and 1968).  The  present  those who  have e i t h e r a u d i t o r y have b o t h  (Doehring,  study would i n c l u d e those w i t h v i s u a l - t e m p o r a l weakness.  F r i e d e s (1974) would add  a fourth"group  the f o r e m e n t i o n e d c o n d i t i o n s a p p l y .  to i n c l u d e those f o r whom none o f  L i k e w i s e Torgesen (1975) suggests t h a t  r e s e a r c h i n d i c a t e s t h a t the r e l a t i o n s h i p between r e a d i n g a b i l i t y  and  p e r c e p t u a l f u n c t i o n i n g i s the r e s u l t of d e f i c i t s i n s p e c i f i c s u b s e t s perceptual functioning.  of  I t would seem t h a t a r e m e d i a l program based on  the  p r i n c i p l e s o u t l i n e d would have a wide s p e c t r u m of i n f l u e n c e i n v i e w o f such a wide range o f i n t e g r a t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s .  A f u r t h e r a r e a of r e s e a r c h  be to use the suggested p r i n c i p l e s i n a r e m e d i a l program and experimental  to conduct an  study on the e f f i c a c y of the program i n i m p r o v i n g  Appropriate  use of the m o d a l i t y  and  l a r g e r u n i t s , would presumably  h e l p i n p r e v e n t i n g over-compensatory use of VS a d e p t n e s s . each of the phonic and  reading.  functions i n blending v i s u a l l y  a u d i t o r i l y p e r c e i v e d phonemes, graphemes and  could  T h i s would p l a c e  s i g h t word approaches to r e a d i n g i n dynamic  balance.  A d o m i n a n t l y VS approach to r e a d i n g would p l a c e undue emphasis on the p r i m a c y  107  effect (Friedes, 1974).  From various aspects of the data analysis  (factor loadings, stimulus main effect, item analysis) a bias towards primacy appears to be a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the poorer readers. v i s u a l input of VS patterns i s slower than for VT patterns. reader often dwells too long on the elements of words.  The  The poorer  These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  may accentuate some of the inappropriate use of the v i s u a l modality by underuse of the temporal processing capacity of this modality.  The  skilled  reader on the other hand i s less bound by the VS element i n word recognition (Smith, 1971). The dynamic balance would thus be not only between v i s u a l and auditory, but also between s p a t i a l and temporal integration experience.  A general  aim would be to reduce the degree of modality s p e c i f i c processing of information by giving experience i n f l e x i b l e use of modalities i n interaction. The complementary nature of the integrations would c a l l for both working from print to auditory production and moving from audition to v i s i o n matching, pronouncing, writing and s p e l l i n g .  through  It i s possible that modal  preference would play a part, and the importance of such a bias would need to be examined i n further research.  The presence of a p r e f e r e n t i a l bias  would not reduce the need for r i c h experience i n sequential a c t i v i t i e s , in order to develop at each step of the learning to read process, the network of neuronal connections necessary for integration of a l l the sensory channels. If as Hardy, Stennett and Smythe (1973) suggest, the s y l l a b l e rather than the phoneme i s the more natural perceptual unit i n beginning reading, this would seem to reinforce the idea of attaining a balance between a n a l y t i c a l s p a t i a l and synthetic sequential use of modalities.  Such a  balance would draw upon both the integrative and d i f f e r e n t i a t i v e functions  108  of m o d a l i t i e s i n p r o c e s s i n g  the i n f o r m a t i o n .  performance would demonstrate p r o c e s s i n g  While b e t t e r  reading  of l a r g e r manageable u n i t s of  p r i n t , undue emphasis would not be p l a c e d upon the g l o b a l VS element.  In  a t t a i n i n g the b a l a n c e , extreme o v e r - a n a l y s i s of words i n t o e x c e s s i v e l y s m a l l s p a t i a l u n i t s would a l s o be I t was  avoided.  i n the e s t a b l i s h i n g of some of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c weaknesses  of poor r e a d e r s i n the i n t e g r a t i o n of s e n s o r y i n f o r m a t i o n and s t a t u s i n terms of m o d a l i t y E f f e c t i v e remediation  adeptness t h a t t h i s study had  of  their  i t s aims.  of r e a d i n g d i f f i c u l t i e s depends upon u n d e r s t a n d i n g  more of the c o n t r i b u t i n g v a r i a b l e s .  A t t e n t i o n was  not g i v e n t o v a r i a b l e s  such as a n x i e t y , m o t i v a t i o n , v e r b a l f a c i l i t y , s p e c i f i c memory a b i l i t i e s a b i l i t y to concentrate  a t t e n t i o n on l e a r n i n g t a s k s , i n the p r e s e n t s t u d y ,  but the w r i t e r does not c o n s i d e r take i n t o a c c o u n t .  or  these to be u n i m p o r t a n t i n f l u e n c e s to  While these f a c t o r s g e n e r a l l y operate together  in  v a r y i n g degrees of c o n t r i b u t o r y i m p o r t a n c e , each one which i n f l u e n c e d a s p e c i f i c , poor r e a d i n g performance would need to be d e a l t w i t h by r e m e d i a l measures. l i m i t reading d e l i n e a t e d and  I f , and  to what degree, s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n i n a d e q u a c i e s  performance, they must be i n c r e a s i n g l y more s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l a t e d to the body of e x i s t e n t knowledge of  and n e u r o p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n t e n t of t h i s  specific  study.  theory,  and  of the r e a d i n g p r o c e s s .  psychological Such was  the  109  REFERENCE NOTES  1.  Leong, C K . Cognitive processes underlying reading d e f i c i t . Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e 4th". I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n g r e s s , I n t e r n a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n f o r t h e S c i e n t i f i c S t u d y o f M e n t a l D e f i c i e n c y (IASSMD), Washington, D.C, August 1976.  2.  J a r m a n , R.F., M a r s h a l l , M.F., & Moore, T.S. C o n s t r u c t i o n of a t a p e - c o n t r o l l e d s y s t e m o f p r e s e n t i n g v i s u a l - s p a t i a l and v i s u a l t e m p o r a l s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s f o r u s e i n c r o s s - m o d a l and intramodal matching t e s t s . M a n u s c r i p t s u b m i t t e d f o r p u b l i c a t i o n , 1978  110  REFERENCES  Bakker, D.J. Temporal o r d e r , meaningfulness and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y . t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1967, 24, 1027-1030.  Percep-  B a i t e r , L., & F o g a r t y , J . I n t r a - and i t i t e r s e n s o r y matching by n u r s e r y school c h i l d r e n . P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1971, 3_3, 467-472. Bannatyne, A. The t r a n s f e r from m o d a l i t y p e r c e p t u a l to m o d a l i t y conceptual. In H.K. Smith ( E d . ) , P e r c e p t i o n and r e a d i n g . Newark, Delaware: I n t e r n a t i o n a l Reading A s s o c i a t i o n , 1968. B a r r e t t , T.C. The e v a l u a t i o n o f c h i l d r e n ' s r e a d i n g achievement. I n t e r n a t i o n a l Reading A s s o c i a t i o n , 1969.  Newark:  Becker, J.T., & S a b a t i n o , D. R e l i a b i l i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l t e s t s o f p e r c e p t i o n a d m i n i s t e r e d u t i l i z i n g group t e c h n i q u e s . Journal of C l i n i c a l Psychology,  1971,  27, 86-88.  Beery, J.W. Matching o f a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l s t i m u l i by average and r e t a r d e d readers. C h i l d Development, 1967, 38, 827-833. Belmont, I . Requirements o f the e a r l y r e a d i n g t a s k . S k i l l s , 1974, 38, 527-537.  P e r c e p t u a l and Motor  Belmont, L., B i r c h , H.G. & Belmont, I . A u d i t o r y - v i s u a l i n t e r s e n s o r y p r o c e s s i n g and v e r b a l m e d i a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f Nervous and M e n t a l D i s e a s e ,  1968, 147, 562-569. Bentzen, F. Sex r a t i o s i n l e a r n i n g and behaviour J o u r n a l o f O r t h o s y c h i a t r y , 1963, 33, 92-98.  disorders.  American  B i r c h , H.G., & Belmont, L. A u d i t o r y - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n i n normal and retarded readers. American J o u r n a l o f O r t h o p s y c h i a t r y , 1964, 34,  852-862. B i r c h , H.G., & Belmont, L . A u d i t o r y - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y i n school c h i l d r e n . P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1965, 2_0, 295-305. B i r c h , H.G., & B i t t e r m a n , M.E. Reinforcement and l e a r n i n g : The p r o c e s s of sensory i n t e g r a t i o n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1949, 5_6_, 292-308. B i r c h , H.G., & B i t t e r m a n , M.E. Sensory I n t e g r a t i o n and c o g n i t i v e t h e o r y . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1951, 5j8, 355-361. Blank, M., & B r i d g e r , W.H. Cross-modal t r a n s f e r i n n u r s e r y - s c h o o l c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l o f Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology, 1964, 5_8, 277-282. Blank, M., & B r i d g e r , W.H. Conceptual cross-modal t r a n s f e r i n deaf and hearing children. C h i l d Development, 1966, _3_7, 29-38.  Ill Bond, G.L., & Tinker, M.A. Reading d i f f i c u l t i e s : Their diagnosis and correction (3rd ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1973. Bryant, P.E. Comments on the design of developmental studies of crossmodal matching and cross-modal transfer. Cortex, 1968, h_, 127-137. Bryden, M.P. Auditory-visual and sequential-spatial matching i n r e l a t i o n to reading a b i l i t y . Child Development, 1972, 43_, 824-832. Buckland, P., & Balbw, B. Effect of v i s u a l perceptual t r a i n i n g on reading achievement. Exceptional Children, 1973, 39, 299-304. Buros, O.K. The Seventh Mental Measurements Yearbook, Vol. I I , New Gryphon, 1972.  Jersey:  Buktenica, N.A. Perceptual screening: Toward i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , p r e d i c t i o n and prevention of reading d i s a b i l i t i e s . B u l l e t i n of the Orton Society, 1970, 20, 72-80. Butters, N., & Brody, B.A. The r o l e of the l e f t p a r i e t a l lobe i n the mediation of i n t r a - and cross-modal associations. Cortex, 1968, 4_, 328-342. C a t t e l l , R.B. Factor analysis: An introduction to essentials I. The purpose and underlying models. Biometrics, 1965, 2_1_, 190-215, (a). C a t t e l l , R.B. Factor analysis: An introduction to essentials I I . The role of factor analysis i n research. Biometrics, 1965, 22^, 405-435, (b). Chalfant, J.C., & Flathouse, V.E. Auditory and v i s u a l learning. Myklebust (Ed.), Progress i n Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s Vol. I I . Grune and Stratton, 1971.  In New  H.R. York:  Chalfant, J.C., & S c h e f f e l i n , M.A. Central processing dysfunctions i n children: A review of research (NINDS, No. 9). Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1969. Chester, R.D. The psychology 1974, 67, 403-411.  of reading.  Journal of Educational Research,  Cohen, G. Hemispheric differences i n s e r i a l versus p a r a l l e l processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973, 9_7, 349-356. Cole, M., Chorover, S.L., & E t t l i n g e r , G. Nature, 1961, 191, 1225-1226.  Cross-modal transfer i n  man.  Connolly, K., & Jones, B. A developmental study of afferent-reafferent integration. B r i t i s h Journal of Psychology, 1970, jj]L, 259-266. Cronbach, L.J. Test v a l i d a t i o n . In R.L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measure: ment (2nd ed.), Washington, D.C: American Council on Education, 1971. Cummins, J . , & Das, J.P. Cognitive processing and reading d i f f i c u l t i e s : A framework for research. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 1977, 23, 245-256.  112 Dimond, S.J., & Beaumont, J.G. Hemispheric function i n the human b r a i n . London: Elek Science, 1974. Doehring, D.G. Patterns of impairment i n s p e c i f i c reading d i s a b i l i t y . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1968. Doehring, D.G. Evaluation of two models of reading d i s a b i l i t y . In R.M. Knights & D.J. Bakker (Eds.), The neuropsychology of learning disorders: Theoretical approaches. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1976. Dwyer, C.A. Sex differences i n reading: An evaluation and a c r i t i q u e of current theories. Review of Educational Research, 1973, 4_3, 455-467. Ebel, R.L. Expected r e l i a b i l i t y as a function of choices per item. and Psychological Measurement, 1969, 29_, 565-570.  Educational  Elkind, D. Piaget's theory of perceptual development: I t s a p p l i c a t i o n to reading and special education. Journal of Special Education, 1967, 1, 351-367. Estes, R.E., & Huizinga, R.J. A comparison of v i s u a l and auditory presentations of a paired-associate learning:-task with learning disabled children. Journal of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1974, 7_, 35-42. E t t l i n g e r , G. Analysis of cross-modal e f f e c t s and their relationship to language. In C.H. M i l l i k a n and F.C. Darley, (Eds.), Brain mechanisms underlying speech and language. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1967. Farr, R., & Anastasiow, N. Tests of reading readiness and achievement: A review and evaluation. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1971. Fisher, R.A., & Yates, F. S t a t i s t i c a l tables for b i o l o g i c a l , a g r i c u l t u r a l and medical research, (6th ed.). London: Oliver & Boyd, 1963. Ford, M. Auditory-visual and t a c t u a l - v i s u a l integration i n r e l a t i o n to reading a b i l i t y . Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1967, 24, 531-541. Freides, D. Human information processing and sensory modality: Crossmodal functions, information complexity, memory and d e f i c i t . Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1974, 81, 284-310. Freides, D. Information complexity and cross-modal functions. Journal of Psychology, 1975, 66, 283-287. Gates, A.I., & MacGinitie, W.H. Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests. York: Teachers College Press, 1965.  British New  Gates, A.I., & MacGinitie, W.H. Technical manual. Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests. New York: Teachers College Press, 1972. Gibson, E.J. P r i n c i p l e s of perceptual learning and development. Appleton-Century-Crof t s , 1969.'  New York:  113  G i b s o n , E . J . The , 136-143.  ontogeny o f r e a d i n g .  Gibson, E . J . , and L e v i n , A. P r e s s , 1975.  American P s y c h o l o g i s t , 1970,  The p s y c h o l o g y o f r e a d i n g .  25,  Cambridge: M.I.T.  Goodnow, J . J . M a t c h i n g a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l s e r i e s : M o d a l i t y problem or t r a n s l a t i o n problem? C h i l d Development, 1971, 42, 1187-1201 ( a ) . Goodnow, J . J . The r o l e o f m o d a l i t i e s i n p e r c e p t u a l and c o g n i t i v e d e v e l o p ment. I n J.P. H i l l ( E d . ) , M i n n e s o t a Symposia on C h i l d P s y c h o l o g y , V. Minneapolis: U n i v e r s i t y of M i n n e s o t a P r e s s , 1971 ( b ) . G r e d l e r , G.R. Severe r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t y - some i m p o r t a n t c o r r e l a t e s . I n J.F. R e i d ( E d . ) , R e a d i n g : Problems and P r a c t i c e s . London: Ward L o c k , 1972. Groenendaal, H.A., & B a k k e r , D.J. The p a r t p l a y e d by m e d i a t i o n p r o c e s s e s i n the r e t e n t i o n o f t e m p o r a l sequences by two r e a d i n g groups. Human Development, 1971, 14, 62-70. Hage, D.S., & S t r o u d , J.B. v e r b a l and n o n v e r b a l . 258-262.  Reading p r o f i c i e n c y and i n t e l l i g e n c e s c o r e s , J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , 1959, 52,  H a k s t i a n , A.R., & Bay, K.S. U s e r s ' manual t o accompany the A l b e r t a G e n e r a l F a c t o r A n a l y s i s Program. D i v i s i o n o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h S e r v i c e s : U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a , 1973. H a m m i l l , D.D., & L a r s e n , S.C. The r e l a t i o n s h i p of s e l e c t e d p e r c e p t u a l s k i l l s and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y . J o u r n a l of L e a r n i n g D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1974, ]_, 429-435. Hardy, M., S t e n n e t t , R.G., & Smythe, P.C. A u d i t o r y segmentation'arid auditory blending i n r e l a t i o n to beginning reading. A l b e r t a Journal of E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , 1973, 19_, 144-158. H o l l o w a y , G.F. A u d i t o r y - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n i n language d e l a y e d c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of L e a r n i n g D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1971, 4_, 204-208. Huey, E.B. The p s y c h o l o g y and pedagogy o f r e a d i n g . MIT P r e s s , 1968.  Cambridge, M a s s a c h u s e t t s :  Jarman, R.F. A method of c o n s t r u c t i o n of a u d i t o r y s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s f o r use i n c r o s s - m o d a l and i n t r a m o d a l m a t c h i n g t e s t s . B e h a v i o u r R e s e a r c h Methods and I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n , 1977, 9_, 22-25 ( a ) . Jarman, R.F. P a t t e r n s of c r o s s - m o d a l and i n t r a m o d a l m a t c h i n g among i n t e l l i g e n c e groups. I n P. M i t t l e r ( E d . ) , Research to p r a c t i c e i n m e n t a l retardation ( V o l . I I ) . B a l t i m o r e : U n i v e r s i t y P a r k P r e s s , 1977 (b) . Jarman, R.F. Cross-modal and i n t r a m o d a l m a t c h i n g : R e l a t i o n s h i p s to s i m u l taneous and s u c c e s s i v e s y n t h e s e s and l e v e l s of performance among t h r e e i n t e l l i g e n c e groups. A l b e r t a J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , 1978, 24, 100-112.  114 Jarman, R.F. M o d a l i t y s p e c i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g and abilities. Intelligence, i n press. Johnson, D.D. Sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a d i n g a c r o s s c u l t u r e s . Q u a r t e r l y , 1973, 9_, 67-86.  intellectual Reading  Research  J o n e s , B., & R o b i n s o n , T. Sensory i n t e g r a t i o n i n normal and r e t a r d e d c h i l d r e n . Developmental P s y c h o l o g y , 1973, 9, 178-182. J o n e s , J.P. A s t u d y of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s among i n t e r s e n s o r y t r a n s f e r , i n t e r s e n s o r y p e r c e p t u a l s h i f t i n g , modal p r e f e r e n c e , and r e a d i n g achievement a t the t h i r d grade l e v e l . (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Georgia, 1970). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1971, 31, 4038-A. (University M i c r o f i l m s , I n c . , Ann A r b o r , M i c h i g a n ) . J o r g e n s o n , G.W., & Hyde, E.M. A u d i t o r y - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n and r e a d i n g p e r f o r m ance i n l o w e r s o c i a l c l a s s c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1974, 66, 718-725. Kahn, D., & B i r c h , H.G. Development of a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n and r e a d i n g achievement. P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1968, 2^7, 459-468. K a r l i n , R. Inc.,  Teaching elementary r e a d i n g . 1975.  New  York:  H a r c o u r t Brace J o v a n o v i c h ,  Kimura, D. Speech l a t e r a l i z a t i o n i n young c h i l d r e n as determined by an a u d i t o r y t e s t . J o u r n a l of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1963, 56, 899-902. K i r b y , J.R., & Das, J.P. Reading achievement, I.Q., and s i m u l t a n e o u s - s u c c e s s i v e p r o c e s s i n g . J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1977, 69_, 564-570. K i r k , R.E. E x p e r i m e n t a l d e s i g n : P r o c e d u r e s f o r the b e h a v i o u r a l s c i e n c e s . Belmont, C a l . : B r o o k s / C o l e , 1968. K l a p p e r , Z.S., & B i r c h , H.G. Developmental c o u r s e o f t e m p o r a l p a t t e r n i n g i n v i s i o n and a u d i t i o n . P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1971, 32_, 547-555. Kuhlman, E.S., & W o l k i n g , W.D. Development o f w i t h i n - and c r o s s - m o d a l m a t c h i n g a b i l i t y i n the a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l sense m o d a l i t i e s . Developmental P s y c h o l o g y , 1972, ]_, 365. Lehman, E.B., & Goodnow, J . Memory f o r r h y t h m i c s e r i e s : Age changes i n a c c u r a c y and number c o d i n g . Developmental P s y c h o l o g y , 1972, b_, 363. L o r g e , I . , T h o r n d i k e , R.L., & Hagen, E. Canadian L o r g e - T h o r n d i k e T e s t s . Canada: Thomas N e l s o n & Sons, 1967.  Intelligence  L o r g e , I . , Thorndike,' R.L., & Hagen, E. Canadian L o r g e - T h o r n d i k e I n t e l l i g e n c e T e s t s . T e c h n i c a l Supplement. Canada: Thomas N e l s o n & Sons, 1972. L u b i n , A. The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 1961, 21, 807-817.  E d u c a t i o n a l and  115 L u r i a , A.R. 1966.  Higher c o r t i c a l functions i n man.  L u r i a , A.R. The working brain: Basic Books Inc., 1973.  New York:  Basic Books, Inc.,  An introduction to neuropsychology.  New York:  MacGinitie, W.H. Evaluating readiness f o r learning to read: A c r i t i c a l review and evaluation of research. Reading Research Quarterly, 1969, 4_, 396-410. McGrady, H.J., & Olson, D.A. V i s u a l and auditory learning processes i n normal children and children with s p e c i f i c learning d i s a b i l i t i e s . Exceptional Children, 1970, 36, 581-589. McNinch, G. Auditory perceptual factors and measured f i r s t - g r a d e reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 1971, 6^, 472-492. Milner, A.D., & Bryant, P.E. Cross-modal matching by young children. of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1970, 7_1, 453-458.  Journal  Milner, B. Interhemispheric differences i n the l o c a l i z a t i o n of psychological processes i n man. B r i t i s h Medical B u l l e t i n , 1971, 2_7, 272-277. Muehl, S., & Kremenak, S. A b i l i t y to match information within and between auditory and v i s u a l sense modalities and subsequent reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1966, _57_, 230-239. Norfleet, M.A. The Bender Gestalt as a group screening instrument f o r f i r s t grade reading p o t e n t i a l . Journal of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1973, _6, 383-388. O'Connor, N., & Hermelin, B. Inter- and intramodal transfer i n children with modality s p e c i f i c general handicaps. B r i t i s h Journal of S o c i a l and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1971, 10, 346-354. O'Connor, N., & Hermelin, B. Seeing and hearing and space and time. ception and Psychophysics, 1972, 11, 46-48.  Per-  Ogston, D.G. The technical standards of i n t e l l e c t i v e tests used i n Alberta elementary schools: A review. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 1973, 19, 270-283. Pollack, C. Neuropsychological aspects of reading and w r i t i n g . the Orton Society, 1976, 26, 19-33.  B u l l e t i n of  Rae, G. Relation of auditory-visual integration to reading and i n t e l l i g e n c e . Journal of General Psychology, 1977, 9_7_, 3-8. R e i l l y , D.H. Auditory-visual integration, sex, and reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971, 62_, 482-486. Robinson, H.M. V i s u a l and auditory modalities related to methods f o r beginning reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 1972, 8_, 6-39. Robinson, H.M. Identifying and planning reading research. In R. Farr, S. Weintraub and B. Tone (Eds.), Improving reading research. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1976.  116 Rubinstein, L., & Gruenberg, E.M. Intramodal and cross-modal sensory transfer arid auditory temporal patterns. Perception and Psychophysics, 1971, 9_, 385-390. Rudnick, M., Martin, V., & S t e r r i t t , G.M. On the r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y of auditory and v i s u a l , temporal and s p a t i a l , integrative and nonintegrative sequential pattern comparisons. Psychonomic Science, 1972, 27, 207-210. Rudnick, M., S t e r r i t t , G.M., & Flax, M. Auditory and v i s u a l rhythm perception and reading a b i l i t y . Child Development, 1967, 3J5, 581-587. Rugel, R.P. WISC subtest scores of disabled readers: A review with respect to Bannatyne's recategorization. Journal of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1974, 7_, 48-55. Sawyer, D. The diagnostic mystique: 1974, 27, 555-561.  A point of view.  Reading Teacher,  Sharan, S., & Calfee, R. The r e l a t i o n of auditory, v i s u a l , and auditoryv i s u a l matching to reading performance of I s r a e l i children. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1977, 130, 151-189. Silverston, R.A. & Deichmann, J.W. Sense modality research and the acquis i t i o n of reading s k i l l s . Review of Educational Research, 1975, 45, 149-172. Smith, F. Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971. Snyder, R., & Pope, P. Auditory and v i s u a l inadequacies i n maturation at the f i r s t grade l e v e l . Journal of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1972, 5_, 620-625. S t e r r i t t , G.M., Martin, V., & Rudnick, M. Auditory-visual and temporals p a t i a l integration as determinants of test d i f f i c u l t y . Psychonomic Science, 1971, 23, 289-291. S t e r r i t t , G.M., & Rudnick, M. Auditory and v i s u a l rhythm perception i n r e l a t i o n to reading a b i l i t y i n fourth grade boys. Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1966, 22, 859-864. Strang, R. S k i l l f u l teaching: Theory and practice. In J.A. Figurel (Ed.), Forging ahead i n reading. Newark: International Reading Association, 1968. Timm, N.H. Multivariate analysis with applications i n education and psychology. Monterey: Brooks/Cole, 1975. Torgesen, J . Problems and prospects i n the study of learning d i s a b i l t i e s . In E.M. Hetherington (Ed.), Review of c h i l d development research Vol. 5. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975. Tower, D.M. A kindergarten screening index to predict reading f a i l u r e . B u l l e t i n of the Orton Society, 1973, 25, 90-105.  117 Vande Voort, L. , & Serif, G.M. Audiovisual integration i n retarded readers. Journal of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1973, 6^ 170-174. Vande Voort, L., Senf, G.M., & Benton, A.L. Development of audiovisual integration i n normal and retarded readers. Child Development, 1972, 43, 1260-1272. Vernon, M.D. Reading and i t s d i f f i c u l t i e s . Press, 1971.  Cambridge:  Cambridge University  Von Wright, J.M. Cross-modal transfer and sensory equivalence - a review. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1970, 1_1, 21-30. Wallbrown, J.D., Wallbrown, F.H., Engin, A.W., & Blaha, J. The prediction of f i r s t grade reading achievement with selected perceptual-cognitive tests. Psychology i n the Schools, 1975, 12, 140-149. Wepman, J.W. The modality concept. In H.K. Smith (Ed.), Perception and reading. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1968. Wilson, R.M. Diagnostic and remedial reading for classroom and c l i n i c . Columbus, Ohio: M e r r i l l , 1972.  APPENDIX A MATCHING TASK STIMULUS PATTERNS  119  ITEM S T I M U L U S  NUMBER  SAME  (S  )/  COMPARISON DIFFERENT(D)  EXAMPLES  1  •• •  •••  S  2  •• •  • ••  D  3  •••  • ••  D  4  • • •  • • •  S  5  • • •  • ••  0  6  • • ••  •• • •  S  7  • • ••  • •••  D  8  • •• •  •• • •  D  9  •• • •  •• • •  S  10  • • ••  • •• •  0  II  • •• •  • •• •  S  12  •• • •  •• • •  S  13  • • ••  • • • •  D  14  • •• • •  • ••••  S  15  • • •• •  •• • • •  S  TEST ITEMS  REST  REST  16  • •• • •  • ••• •  D  17  •• • ••  •• •• •  D  18  • • •• •  •• •• •  S  19  • • • ••  • • •• •  0  20  • •• • •  • •• • •  S  120  ITEM NUMBER  SAME S T I M U L U S  COM  (S  DIFFERENT(D)  21  • •• • •  D  22  •• • •• •  ••• •••  0  23  • •* * • •  • • •• • •  S  • • • •• • •• • •• •  • •• • • •  D  24 25  D  REST 26  REST  • • • •• •  D  27  D  28  D  29  S  30  • •• • • • •  S  •• • •• • •  31 32 33  • • • •• • • • • •• • • •  0 D 0  34 35  ) /  PARISON  D  • •• • • •  Figure 9.  • • •• • • •  Matching task stimulus patterns.  S  APPENDIX B SLIDE DURATION TIMING  122  S l i d e D u r a t i o n Timing U s i n g the o r i g i n a l c a s s e t t e t a p e s , the l e n g t h s o f the b l a n k spaces w h i c h r e p r e s e n t e d a l l t h e v i s u a l - s p a t i a l s t i m u l u s p r e s e n t a t i o n s were timed and r e c o r d e d . of  From the tone and pause dimensions the t o t a l  the a u d i t o r y p a t t e r n s were c a l c u l a t e d and r e c o r d e d .  duration  These d u r a t i o n s  were then c o n v e r t e d p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y t o f i t the range o f two t o f o u r seconds which was  s e t as the d u r a t i o n f o r s l i d e p r e s e n t a t i o n on the b a s i s of t h e  l i t e r a t u r e and p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h (Jarman, 1978).  These t i m e s (time a v a i l -  a b l e on the tape and time r e q u i r e d f o r p r e s e n t a t i o n ) were e n t e r e d i n t o a d e t a i l e d s c r i p t o f the t a p e . The n e x t s t a g e was v i s u a l system.  to c o n v e r t the tapes f o r use i n a s l i d e - s y n c a u d i o -  T h i s system i s u s u a l l y comprised of a two t r a c k tape r e c o r d e r  and s l i d e p r o j e c t o r .  One  t r a c k of the r e c o r d e r i s used f o r the a u d i b l e  i n f o r m a t i o n , i n t h i s case v e r b a l i n s t r u c t i o n s and tone b u r s t s ( b e e p s ) .  The  o t h e r o r cue t r a c k i s used f o r a d v a n c i n g the p r o j e c t o r by means of programmed i n a u d i b l e tone b u r s t s . The o r i g i n a l v e r b a l i n s t r u c t i o n s and tones (1000 Hz) were t r a n s f e r r e d to one t r a c k of a v a r i a b l e speed, r e e l - t o - r e e l two t r a c k tape r e c o r d e r , s e t at the h i g h e s t speed, 1\ i p s .  The tape was  then p l a y e d back a t 1 7/8 i p s  (one q u a r t e r s p e e d ) , d u r i n g w h i c h t i m e the cue tones f o r a d v a n c i n g the p r o j e c t o r were r e c o r d e d on the o t h e r t r a c k .  The d u r a t i o n time was  multiplied  by f o u r and the tones were m a n u a l l y keyed u s i n g a s i g n a l g e n e r a t o r ( s e t a t 250 Hz) and an e l e c t r o n i c s t o p w a t c h .  A 0.8  s e c . c o n s t a n t was added t o t h e  p e r i o d between the cue change tones f o r each s l i d e to compensate f o r the response time of the f i n a l p l a y b a c k machinery. T h i s f i n a l r e c o r d i n g was  then t r a n s f e r r e d a t the o r i g i n a l speed onto  a two t r a c k a u d i o c a s s e t t e , s l i d e - s y n c tape r e c o r d e r .  The cue t r a c k , b e i n g  123 t r a n s f e r r e d a t f o u r times i t s r e c o r d e d speed, showed a s l i d e  duration  e r r o r of no g r e a t e r  transferred  at 1000 Hz  than ± 0.'2 s e c .  The i n a u d i b l e cue tones  ( f o u r times t h e o r i g i n a l r e c o r d e d frequency) which f i t t e d  d e s i g n of the f i n a l p l a y b a c k  machinery.  the  APPENDIX C VISUAL-TEMPORAL TEST CONSTRUCTION  125  Visual-Temporal  For AV  c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e VT  slide/sync cassette  circuits  (a tone  T h e VT for  recorded  a t 1000 Hz.  selected  from  could  tape recorder  condition required  that  and p a t t e r n  as t h i s  i n the verbal  two  first  to  t h e cue t r a c k r e c o r d - p l a y b a c k  lamp  cable the  decoder.  top  of the decoder.  control  a tone decoder  driver.  Signals  switch  o f t h e lamp.  a n d a s 1000  track.  Power  Hz  tones  track  already these  was  directly  t h e head  were  to respond  12 v o l t ,  of the 100  milliamp  by a 2-conductor  shielded  to the "sync  plugged  (light  on t o p o f t h e d e c o d e r p e r m i t t e d  i n " of  i n t o a socket  c o n t r o l l e d by a switch  i n d i c a t e d b y t h e L.E.D.  to  bursts.  connected  t o t h e lamp was  t o t h e d e c o d e r was  from  tone  recorder  comprising  connected  The r e s p o n s e  o f t h e 500 Hz  to the tape  cord  The  To o v e r c o m e  programmed  speed v a r i a t i o n ) .  out" of the recorder  extension  directly  circuit,  T h i s was  d r i v e r t o t u r n on a s m a l l  coupled  d e c o d e r b o x a n d power was A press-button  required  were  built.  tape head.  f o r the duration  and t h e "sync An  was  a n d lamp  f o r tape  t h e lamp  T h e d e c o d e r was  n o t be  change cues.  t o t h e t o n e d e c o d e r w h i c h was  (± 10 Hz  signalled  were  of these  a m p l i f i e r , tone decoder  incandescent  for slide  electronic circuits  an  decoder  still  could  flashed  which  t r a n s f e r r e d on t o t h e cue t r a c k as t h i s  problems,  and s e n t  lamp b e  tone b u r s t s  i n s t r u c t i o n s on t h a t  tones  2551  required.  incandescent  t h e lamp was  3M  I n a d d i t i o n , two e l e c t r o n i c  as t h e a u d i b l e  track  i n a u d i b l e 1000 Hz  tones  a small  the audible  The  used.  a Wollensak  d i v i d e r ) were  to f l a s h  contained  500 Hz  was  tones  n o t be d i r e c t l y  amplified  patterns,  The  inherent  Tone d e c o d e r :  Construction  stimulus  d e c o d e r and a b i n a r y  t h e same d u r a t i o n  t o n e s were  Test  emitting  testing  and  on t h e on t h e  diode). manual  126 Binary divider:  The  second c i r c u i t was  o r i g i n a l , a u d i b l e 1000  a binary divider c i r c u i t .  Hz tone b u r s t s were p l a y e d back through  c i r c u i t and d i v i d e d t o 500 Hz.  The  Hz  this  These 500 Hz tone b u r s t s were s i m u l t a n e o u s l y  r e - r e c o r d e d onto the i n a u d i b l e cue t r a c k . o n l y to the 1000  The  s l i d e changer thus responded  tones.  speaker output  from the r e c o r d e r was  connected v i a a Y c o r d to  an a u x i l l i a r y speaker and to the d i v i d e r i n p u t o f the decoder. c o n t r o l was  The  s e t so t h a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y  f e d t o the d i v i d e r i n p u t .  T h i s was  4.5  v o l t s p-p  The  volume  (peak t o peak) AG  was  the v a l u e r e q u i r e d f o r the d i v i d e r t o  operate p r o p e r l y . For tones r e c o r d e d on the W o l l e n s a k 2551 m o d u l a t i o n ) , an o s c i l l o s c o p e was  AV r e c o r d e r a t 0 VTJ  (100%  p l a c e d on the d i v i d e r output and the volume  c o n t r o l t u r n e d up u n t i l a s t a b l e square wave output o f 500 Hz showed on oscilloscope.  An a u d i b l e d i s t o r t i o n was  then e v i d e n t on the  the  auxilliary  speaker. The output of the d i v i d e r was  f e d i n t o the sync i n p u t of the r e c o r d e r  v i a a s h i e l d e d 1-conductor c a b l e .  The output g a i n was  out g a i n on the decoder.  s e t f o r 1 v o l t AC n o m i n a l .  T h i s was  c o n t r o l l e d v i a the Too  large a  s i g n a l caused the p r o j e c t o r t o advance, w h i l e too s m a l l a s i g n a l d i d not l i g h t the lamp p r o p e r l y .  Completion  of Tapes f o r a l l C o n d i t i o n s  C o n s t r u c t i o n of the f i v e new temporal  element was  tapes f o r the a d d i t i o n o f the v i s u a l -  thus a c h i e v e d by d i v i d i n g the 1000  Hz a u d i b l e sound  p a t t e r n s on c o p i e s o f the t h r e e o r i g i n a l tapes w h i c h c o n t a i n e d the a u d i t o r y element, and  s i m u l t a n e o u s l y r e - r e c o r d i n g them on the cue t r a c k .  Once the  127  transfer was made, the o r i g i n a l audible tone bursts were erased from the audio-track.  The AT-AT test thus became VT-VT, and the AT-VS test and i t s  converse became the VT-VS test and i t s converse.  When the AT-AT test had  the i n i t i a l s t i m u l i altered i t became VT-AT, and when the comparison half was altered t h i s became AT-VT.  Thus a l l nine combinations of cross-modal  and intramodal tasks were accounted f o r and presented i n an accurate and consistent manner, with s t i m u l i i d e n t i c a l within the standard and comparison conditions,  and across the v i s u a l and auditory temporal dimensions.  C i r c u i t Descriptions Power supply:  The power supply provided i 15 v o l t s DC and + 5 v o l t s DC.  The l i n e l e v e l AC was transformed and r e c t i f i e d and f i l t e r e d  (DI - D4: see Figure 10)  (C17, C18). This voltage, ± 35 v o l t s DC, was then regulated  to + 15 v o l t s DC by IC6 and to -15 v o l t s DC by IC7. A +5 v o l t s source was obtained by IC5.  Divider  section:  The AC signal from the tape recorder speaker was fed  through C l l (see Figure 11) to a low pass f i l t e r  (C12, C13, R12, R13) to  eliminate any high frequency component from a f f e c t i n g the d i v i d e r . signal was then fed to half of IC3, a dual binary d i v i d e r . output was fed to a unity gain Op. Amp.  The  The divider  IC4 and the output, controlled  by R15, was fed back to the tape recorder sync input.  Tone-'decoder:  The signal from the sync head was AC coupled v i a C l , C2  to a d i f f e r e n t i a l amplifier IC1. The common mode rejection r a t i o n (R4), was adjuted for minimum hum at 60 Hz.  The output of IC1 was AC coupled  to a tone decoder IC2. This decoder's free running frequency was adjusted  HAMMOND 166G28 28V CT SEC  MOTOROLA MDA-920A-2 D1-D4  T i  +15V DC o — —  + 5VDC  Figure 1 0 .  LM 340LAH  Power s u p p l y .  C21  LM 340T-15  CO  129  by C6 and R6 (set to 500 Hz), the decoding loop f i l t e r s C7 and C8.  section being set by the two  The output of the decoder was inverted by Ql and  fed to Q2 which acted as an inverter and lamp driver. prevented superfluous o s c i l l a t i o n s . of the lamp (see Figure 12).  The f i l t e r , C9,  Switch SW1 was f o r manual operation  +5V 1C3  NAT. k CD4520  1,  J4 R15>— 100K<> OUT f — GAIN | TO SYNC. INPUT, MAX 2V RMS  J3  TSPEAKER I INPUT Figure 11.  Divider  section.  +5V  20K(FREQUENCY ADJ.)  SYNC. HEAD  F i g u r e 12.  Tone decoder.  APPENDIX D REVISED SLIDE PRESENTATION TIMES  Table A Revised Slide Presentation Times Item  Time  Item  Time  Item  Time  6.  1.1 sec.  16.  1.6 sec.  26.  2.25  7.  1.1  17.  1.6  27.  2.25  8.  1.5  18.  1.8  28.  2.5  9.  1.5  19.  2.2  29.  2.5  10.  1.75  20.  2.2  30.  1.8  11.  1.75  21.  2.2  31.  2.1  12.  1.75  22.  1.75  32.  2.1  13.  1.75  23.  2.0  33.  2.5  14.  1.6  24.  2.0  34.  2.75  15.  1.6  25.  2.0  35.  3.0  APPENDIX E SCRIPT FOR INTRODUCTION OF THE MATCHING TASKS  135  An Example of S c r i p t s Used f o r I n t r o d u c i n g Matching Test 8.  Tasks  Dots - l i g h t s , VS-VT.  Today we a r e going t o l o o k a t some p i c t u r e s . l o o k a t some f l a s h i n g l i g h t s .  We a r e a l s o g o i n g t o  A l l o f t h e p i c t u r e s w i l l be l i t t l e  A l l o f t h e l i g h t s w i l l be f l a s h e s o f a l i g h t b u l b . a k i n d o f game w i t h these p i c t u r e s and l i g h t s . of t h e l i g h t s a r e t h e same as some of t h e d o t s .  dots.  We a r e g o i n g t o p l a y  We a r e g o i n g t o see i f some We w i l l a l s o see i f some  of t h e l i g h t s a r e d i f f e r e n t f r o m some o f t h e d o t s .  Let's look c a r e f u l l y  a t t h i s p i c t u r e ( ... ) . Now l e t ' s l o o k a t these f l a s h e s o f l i g h t D i d you n o t i c e t h a t t h e l i g h t s were n o t the same as t h e dots? a t them b o t h a g a i n . The  Ready f o r t h e d o t s  ).  Let's look  ( ••• ) and now t h e l i g h t s  l i g h t s were n o t the same as t h e d o t s were they?  ( ".  (. . . ) .  They were d i f f e r e n t  from each o t h e r . L e t ' s compare some d o t s and l i g h t s t h a t a r e t h e same as each o t h e r . Ready, ( ... ) and ( ... ) . Those were the same as each o t h e r weren't  they?  How can we w r i t e on paper t h a t t h e l a s t one was t h e same as t h e f i r s t one or was d i f f e r e n t from t h e f i r s t one?  On t h e paper i n f r o n t o f you t h e words  same and d i f f e r e n t a r e w r i t t e n down f o r each s e t o f d o t s and l i g h t s t h a t we w i l l compare.  L e t ' s l o o k a t some more d o t s and l i g h t s and see how we would  w r i t e down t h e answer. weren't they?  Ready, ( ... ) ( . . . ) . They were t h e same,  I f we l o o k a t No. 1 on t h e page, t h e word same has a c i r c l e  around i t t o show t h a t t h e d o t s and l i g h t s were the same as each o t h e r . L e t ' s l o o k a t t h e d o t s and l i g h t s f o r No. 2. The  Ready;,  ( ...) and (.! . .. ) .  l i g h t s were d i f f e r e n t from t h e d o t s , weren't they?  I f we l o o k a t No. 2  on the page, a c i r c l e has been drawn round t h e word d i f f e r e n t t o show t h a t they were d i f f e r e n t .  L e t ' s l o o k a t t h e d o t s and l i g h t s f o r No. 3.  Ready,  136  (.. .) and (. . . ) • They were d i f f e r e n t , weren't they?  So a c i r c l e has  been drawn around t h e word d i f f e r e n t f o r No. 3. Now, would you l i k e t o t r y some?  Use t h e p e n c i l t o c i r c l e t h e r i g h t  word a f t e r you have seen t h e d o t s and l i g h t s .  L e t ' s do No. 4.  Ready, (. .  and (. . . ) . (Pause f o r answer)„ D i d you c i r c l e t h e word same f o r No. 4? That i s t h e r i g h t answer. and (. . . ) .  (Pause)  i s the r i g h t  answer.  L e t ' s t r y a n o t h e r one - No. 5.  Ready, (. . .)  D i d you c i r c l e t h e word d i f f e r e n t f o r No. 5?  That  Now we w i l l do some more o f t h e s e u s i n g t h e tape r e c o r d e r t o g i v e t h e instructions.  A f t e r each group o f d o t s and l i g h t s , c i r c l e t h e r i g h t  answer  on y o u r paper t o show i f they were the same o r i f they were d i f f e r e n t . A f t e r the word r e a d y , be s u r e t o watch and l i s t e n c a r e f u l l y so as n o t t o miss the dots o r l i g h t s .  APPENDIX F PARTICIPATING SCHOOLS  A n n i e v i l l e Elementary  School  9240 - 112th S t r e e t , D e l t a  Brooke Elementary  School  8781 Delwood D r i v e , D e l t a  Chalmers Elementary  School  11315 - 75th Avenue, D e l t a  Devon Gardens Elementary  School  8884 R u s s e l l D r i v e , D e l t a  Gibson Elementary  School  11451 - 90th Avenue, D e l t a  Gray Elementary  School  10855 - 80th Avenue, D e l t a  H e l l i n g s Elementary  School  11655 - 86th Avenue, D e l t a  Sunshine H i l l s Elementary  School  11285 Bond B o u l e v a r d , D e l t a  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 14 1
China 4 0
Russia 3 0
Iran 1 0
Portugal 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 8 23
Redmond 5 1
Beijing 4 0
Ashburn 3 0
Sunnyvale 1 0
Seattle 1 0
Gostar 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054419/manifest

Comment

Related Items