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 presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree ly ava i l ab le for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of th is thesis for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives. It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion of th is thes is fo r f inanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my writ ten permission. Department of The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ^ 3 > / f / 7 7 ABSTRACT Research Supervisor: Dr. R. F. Jarman The need was presented 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 processing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the reader. The approach used was i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the sensory i n t e g r a t i o n and c o g n i t i v e processing a b i l i t i e s of above average and below average readers as i n f e r r e d from cross-modal and intramodal matching of v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and temporal information. The tasks required that a stimulus p a t t e r n presented i n one modality dimension be compared with a second p a t t e r n i n e i t h e r the same or a d i f f e r e n t modality dimension. Subjects were r e q u i r e d to c l a s s i f y p a i r s of s t i m u l i (standard and comparison) as same or d i f f e r e n t . With three modality dimensions, namely a u d i t o r y temporal (AT), v i s u a l temporal (VT), and v i s u a l s p a t i a l (VS), there were nine combinations of p a i r e d s t i m u l i . These were AT-AT, AT-VT, AT-VS, VT-AT, VT-VT, VT-VS?,. VS-AT, VS-VT, and VS-VS. To present these s t i m u l i f o r matching, i n a p r e c i s e and c o n s i s t e n t manner, nine 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 constructed. Stimulus patterns were s e r i e s of dots ( s l i d e s ) , a u d i t o r y beeps or f l a s h e s of a l i g h t bulb... Each task contained 30 p a i r s of items randomly arranged f o r sameness or d i f f e r e n c e . Subjects were 72 boys and 72 g i r l s from 24 grade three c l a s s e s i n eight North D e l t a Schools. Half of each sex group were above average readers (high) and h a l f were below average (low). A l l four groups were matched f o r non-verbal i n t e l l i g e n c e . The mean reading grade l e v e l f o r low readers was 3.2 and f o r high readers 5.8. Mean I.Q. f o r a l l groups was 94. Subjects i n small groups rece i v e d the nine tasks i n a counterbalanced i i i o r d e r o f p r e s e n t a t i o n o v e r a p e r i o d o f 10 weeks. A n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e r e s u l t s showed a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r r e a d i n g w i t h h i g h r e a d e r s s u p e r i o r on a l l matching t a s k s . A v e r y s t r o n g main e f f e c t was found f o r the s t a n d a r d s t i m u l u s due m a i n l y to the (easy) VS p a t t e r n s and to the g r e a t e r d i f f i c u l t y o f VT s t a n d a r d s . A s t r o n g main e f f e c t was a l s o found f o r the comparison s t i m u l i due to e a s i e r VS c o m p a r i - sons. A s i g n i f i c a n t s t a n d a r d X comparison i n t e r a c t i o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t VT s t a n d a r d s made AT comparisons more d i f f i c u l t than w i t h AT s t a n d a r d s , w h i l e the r e v e r s e h e l d f o r VT comparisons. A s i g n i f i c a n t comparison X r e a d i n g i n t e r a c t i o n showed the same d i s o r d i n a l i n t e r a c t i o n o f AT and VT s t i m u l i , p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r low r e a d e r s . As t h e r e was no s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r sex, d a t a were p o o l e d a c r o s s sex and f a c t o r a n a l y s e d by p r i n c i p a l components s o l u t i o n w i t h varimax r o t a t i o n . D i f f e r e n t f a c t o r l o a d i n g s f o r h i g h and low r e a d e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t d i f f e r e n t c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s were i n v o l v e d i n the i n t e g r a t i o n of a u d i t o r y , v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and tempo r a l i n f o r m a t i o n by t h e s e two groups. Tasks l o a d e d on s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l f a c t o r s r a t h e r than v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y . I n s p e c t i o n showed t h a t p u r e l y s p a t i a l t a s k s were e a s i e s t w h i l e p u r e l y temporal t a s k s were most d i f f i c u l t . P a i r w i s e comparisons showed t h a t c r o s s - modal matches were s i g n i f i c a n t l y more d i f f i c u l t than i n t r a m o d a l o n l y f o r low r e a d e r s . S i m i l a r l y , p r o c e s s i n g temporal 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 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 p r o c e s s i n g s p a t i a l i n f o r m a - t i o n , o n l y f o r low r e a d e r s . An i t e m a n a l y s i s examined the d i s c r i m i n a t o r y power of items w i t h i n t h e t a s k s i n terms of 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 and i t e m s t r u c t u r e . Kuder- R i c h a r d s o n f o r m u l a 20 r e l i a b i l i t i e s showed t h e t a s k s to be o f adequate r e l i a b i l i t y . iv Findings were discussed in relation to the modality-specific view of sensory functioning which appeared to apply only to low readers. Findings were also discussed in terms of the writing of Luria, deriving from studies of brain-behaviour relationships, and the paradigm of simultaneous and successive processing arising out of Luria's work. Implications of the findings for 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 v i i i LIST OF FIGURES ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS x DEDICATION x i CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 6 Sensory Modalities and Reading 6 Modality Matching and Reading 8 Test Ceiling and Low Reliability 18 Presentation of Auditory Temporal Stimuli 20 Mediation in Modality Matching 23 Memory in Modality Matching 26 Developmental Trends and Matching Difficulty 27 Sex and SES Effects 29 Intelligence and Modality Matching 30 Summary and Conclusions 31 CHAPTER III 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 v i Page Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests, Level C, Form 2 . . 42 Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test 43 Modality Matching Tests 44 Visual spatial stimuli 44 Auditory temporal stimuli 45 Visual temporal stimuli 45 Scoring Procedures 47 Materials 47 Procedure 48 CHAPTER V RESULTS 51 Subject Classifications 51 Matching Tasks and Classification Variables 53 Matching Task Reliability 56 Mean Task Performance 58 Hypothesis 1 59 Task Difficulty in Cross-modal and Intramodal Matching. 59 Item Analyses 71 Item Complexity 72 Item Structure 72 Items Within Tasks 75 Visual, Auditory, Spatial and Temporal Integrations. 76 Hypotheses 2.1 and 2.2 77 Cognitive Processes 78 Hypothesis 3 83 CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION 84 Reading, Modality Matching and Intelligence 85 Sex Differences in Reading and Modality Matching . . . 89 v i i Page Modality Matching and Reading 91 Stimulus Elements and Matching Task Performance 93 Implications for Reading 103 REFERENCES 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 for Introduction of the Matching Tasks . . . . 134 F Participating Schools 137 v i i i LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Variables to be Considered in Modality Matching Research . 12 2. Characteristics of Reading Groups 41 3. Reliability Data 42 4. Correlations of Reading and I.Q. Measures 52 5. Correlations of Modality Matching and Reading Measures: Boys 53 6. Correlations of Modality Matching and Reading Measures: Girls 54 7. Correlations of Matching Tasks and Non-Verbal I.Q 56 8. Reliability Coefficients for Matching Tasks 57 9. Mean Errors on Matching Tasks 58 10. Differences Between Means for Pairwise Comparisons . . . . 70 11. Point Biserial Correlations for Discriminating Items . . . 73 12. Intercorrelations of Matching Tasks for Low and High Readers 78 13. Principal Components Analysis with Varimax Rotation: Low Readers 80 14. Principal Components Analysis with Varimax Rotation: High Readers 81 A. Revised Slide Presentation Times 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 . 46 3. Orders of Presentation of the Matching Tasks for Each of the Groups Numbered One to Nine 49 4. Sources of Main Effect for 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 . . . 65 8. Matching Task Error Scores for Reading Groups 68 9. Matching Task Stimulus Patterns 119 10. Power Supply 128 11. Divider Section 130 12. Tone Decoder 131 X ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to acknowledge my indebtedness to the Ed u c a t i o n a l Research I n s t i t u t e of B r i t i s h Columbia, the Canada Council and the Canadian S o c i e t y f o r the Study of Education, f o r f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e i n the c a r r y i n g out of t h i s research and the w r i t i n g of t h i s t h e s i s . I would l i k e to express my thanks to Dr. P. R. Koopman, Dr. 0. A. (Buff) Oldridge and Dr. J . Shapiro f o r guidance and help as members of my t h e s i s committee, and e s p e c i a l l y to Dr. Ron Jarman, my t h e s i s s u p e r v i s o r and committee chairman, without whose help t h i s study would never have m a t e r i a l - i z e d . 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 to the other members of the examining committee. I would l i k e to thank Tom Moore f o r c r e a t i n g the tapes and the e l e c t r o n i c c i r c u i t s , and Karen Blunt f o r the typing of both proposal and t h e s i s . I would l i k e to express my a p p r e c i a t i o n to the Superintendent of the Delta School Board f o r permission to conduct the study, and i n p a r t i c u l a r the P r i n c i p a l s , teachers and students involved i n the study f o r t h e i r co- oper a t i o n and patience. To members of my Dayspring Fellowship f a m i l y , f o r prayer, f i n a n c i a l , and p r a c t i c a l support - 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 to my two companions i n t h i s venture: to my wif 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 wi 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 to my daughter, 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 at the age of 20 months sums i t a l l up ... "Daddy gone ' B e r s i t y see Ron?". x i DEDICATION TO THE MEMORY OF THE LATE PROFESSOR PHILIP ASHTON SMITHELLS PIONEER EDUCATIONALIST INSPIRER OF STUDENTS CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION And so to completely analyse what we do when we read would almost be the acme of a p s y c h o l o g i s t ' s achievements, f o r i t would be to describe very many of the most i n t r i c a t e workings of the human mind, as w e l l as to unravel the tangled s t o r y of the most remarkable s p e c i f i c performance that c i v i l i z a t i o n has learned 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 of a wealth of research, there continues to be a poverty of systematic knowledge about the processes by which c h i l d r e n l e a r n to read. F a i l u r e to l e a r n to read ranks among the most s e r i o u s educational problems f a c i n g us today (McGrady & Olson, 1970; Tower, 1973) . Although i n c i d e n c e v a r i e s from country to country i t has been estimated that i n the United States of America, some 10 to 30 percent of school c h i l d r e n do not read w e l l enough to meet the requirements of school and s o c i e t y (Bond & Tinke r , 1973; Gibson & L e v i n , 1975; K a r l i n , 1975). A s i m i l a r trend could be expected f o r Canada. Besides being a problem to hi m s e l f , the problem reader i n time develops problems with h i s peers, a t school and ait.•.home (Wilson, 1972) . I t would be easy to j u s t i f y f u r t h e r research i n reading and reading d i s a b i l i t i e s on these grounds alone. However, the very complexity of the processes of l e a r n i n g to read and the l a c k of unequivocal research f i n d i n g s on what processes lead to e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e reading, demand that ongoing research i n t o reading and reading d i s o r d e r s be sustained and developed. Numerous approaches to the study of reading have been taken but the success 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 the a c q u i s i t i o n 2 of reading s k i l l s has not been outstanding (Belmont, 1974). Curriculum research i n reading has dominated the scene s i n c e 1920 without consumers being able to say that any one method of teaching reading i s b e t t e r than another. Although curriculum research continues, theory based research on how c h i l d r e n read i s again coming i n t o i t s own (Gibson & L e v i n , 1975). Theory-based research, i n c o n t r a s t to addressing the outcomes of methods of teaching reading, i s concerned with the processes i n v o l v e d , guided by t h e o r i e s of reading, 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 - i n g . As w i t h c u r r i c u l u m research, however, theory-based research cannot cl a i m much success i n c o n t r i b u t i n g to red u c t i o n of reading f a i l u r e . One of the main reasons f o r t h i s i s that approaches are o f t e n based upon untested 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 of le a r n i n g tasks and pe r c e p t i v e competencies i n v o l v e d i n reading (Belmont, 1974). A n a l y s i s of the reading process has taken many forms (Gibson, 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 reading have ranged from complex per c e p t u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s to v e r b a l l y mediated comprehension of meaning. The p s y c h o l o g i c a l processes i n v o l v e d i n reading are numerous and complex, and vary at d i f f e r e n t stages of l e a r n i n g to read (Huey, 1968; M a c G i n i t i e , 1969; Vernon, 1971). The bulk of research appears to support a general schema i n v o l v i n g perception of graphic s t i m u l i , t r a n s f e r of t h i s informa- t i o n through a mediating process 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 data, culminating i n a perceptual response which v a r i e s w i t h the maturity and a b i l i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l reader (Chester, 1974; Huey, 1968). I t i s i n the context of such schema that 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 Le v i n (1975) suggest that although 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 inf o r m a t i o n from w r i t t e n t e x t , reading 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 needs to be f u r t h e r explored. The foundations f o r l a t e r mature reading 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 of the f i r s t few years of l e a r n i n g to read. C l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the perceptual approach to: reading has been research concerned with sensory dynamics ( S i l v e r s t o n & Deichmann, 1975). Any survey of f a c t o r s which appear to i n t e r a c t with development of e a r l y reading 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 a b i l i t i e s (Robinson, 1972). Modality research has l a r g e l y centered around the r e l a t i v e importance of these two s i n g l e m o d a l i t i e s and analyses of the 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 . Such i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , w i t h t h e i r bases i n sensory p e r c e p t i o n , have by the same token been deeply rooted i n c o g n i t i v e theory which concerns i t s e l f w i t h p e r c e p t u a l experience data, i n f o r m a t i o n storage and i n f o r m a t i o n r e t r i e v a l ( S i l v e r s t o n & Deichmann, 1975) . C o g n i t i v e theory places 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 to l e a r n i n g tasks such as reading. This emphasis i s expressed i n a number of approaches to theo r i e s of reading, one of which i s known as the 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 expressed i n terms of adaptive r u l e s or s t r a t e g i e s , created by the c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g of the i n d i v i d u a l , which motivate and enhance perc e p t u a l performance i n reading. Modality dynamics enter i n t o the process of developing adaptive s t r a t e g i e s . The c l o s e l i n k and developmental r e l a t i o n s h i p between p e r i p h e r a l sensory processes and c e n t r a l processes i n c o n t r o l l i n g perception i s emphasized by E l k i n d (1967), f o r example, i n applying Piaget's theory of p e r c e p t u a l 4 development to reading. The principles of perceptual learning are sufficiently specific that when inadequately incorporated into the cognitive functioning of developing children, such children w i l l have di f f i c u l t y in learning to read (Gredler, 1972). Wepman too, (1968) stressed the necessity of establishing perceptual bases of conceptual learning. While the danger exists of attempting to "explain" reading disability on the basis of a particular bias or viewpoint, Gredler (1972) considers that to explain adequately the differential functioning of good and poor readers, specific study of processes such as intersensory integration need to be directly investigated. Huey (1968) considered that in 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 results of the f i r s t two stages are translated into meaning. Sawyer (1974), like Huey, suggests that future efforts 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 far beyond the mastery of reading s k i l l s : We must begin to appreciate the human child 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 collectively unable to comprehend how he learns what he learns as rapidly as he learns, (p. 561) 5 In summary, the need is presented for further research of reading a b i l i t i e s in their early development. At this stage, perceptual develop- ment and the integration of auditory and visual information is particularly important. One approach to the study of early reading a b i l i t i e s is to investigate cognitive processing as inferred from a b i l i t y to integrate information within and between visual and auditory modalities. A technique of studying such auditory-visual integration is known as cross-modal and intramodal matching of auditory and visual stimulus patterns. A stimulus pattern presented in one modality is followed by a comparison pattern in a second modality, the subject being required to judge the equivalence of the two patterns. Matching of patterns in the same modality is designated intramodal matching. For two patterns presented in different modalities a cross-modal match i s called for. A further consideration i s involved when visual stimuli can be presented in both a spatial and a temporal dimension. Modality matching may thus be viewed as requiring integrations within and between auditory and visual, spatial and temporal dimensions. This study attempts to cl a r i f y the role of some of the perceptually based s k i l l s and strategies involved in reading by comparing the cross-modal, intramodal, spatial 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 level. Differential functioning of good and poor readers at such sensory integrations permits examination of inferred cognitive processing characteristics and investi- gation of the interaction of stimulus elements as integration requirements change from task to task. An attempt is also made to improve upon some of the weaknesses of previous research, evident in the reviewed literature. 6 CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE For the la r g e m a j o r i t y of 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 au d i t o r y perception and the i n t e g r a t i o n of these two m o d a l i t i e s are e s s e n t i a l to achieve- ment i n reading. Ruth Strang (p. 139) Sensory M o d a l i t i e s and Reading Considerable research i n recent years has examined the place of sensory systems i n c h i l d r e n ' s reading (Doehring, 1968; F r e i d e s , 1974; Hammill & Larsen, 1974; McNinch, 1971; Robinson, 1972; S i l v e r s t o n & Deichmann, 1975). Problems have l a r g e l y centered around the r e l a t i v e importance of e i t h e r v i s u a l or 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 inter--sensory and i n t r a s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n to reading a b i l i t y . This study proposes to i n v e s t i g a t e the l a t t e r aspect, namely the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of intramodal 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 of good and poor readers. The term i n t e g r a t i o n i s used i n the sense that perceived stimulus information from one sense modality i s a p p l i e d to a second stimulus 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 modality, the inf o r m a t i o n being used r e l a t i o n a l l y to the degree r e q u i r e d by the c o g n i t i v e task i n v o l v e d . Cross-modal research has come a long way s i n c e Cole, Chorover and E t t l i n g e r (1961) f i r s t s t a t e d that they found no evidence f o r a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l cross-modal matching i n man. Sensory i n t e g r a t i o n can be regarded as a s t a r t i n g point f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the processes of perceptual 7 organization and conceptualization at different levels and for different cognitive tasks (Bannatyne, 1968; Birch & Bitterman, 1949). Birch and Belmont (1965) c i t e a growing body of evidence that integration of informa- tion from different sensory modalities i s a basic mechanism subserving a l l adaptive functioning. Birch and Bitterman (1951) considered that sensory integration 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 transferring 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 early reading process thus shows that several kinds of integrations among the auditory and v i s u a l modalities are c a l l e d for. Integrations within 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) l i a i s o n . In view of the sequential nature of reading along a l i n e of p r i n t , integration of a temporal element i s also involved for the v i s u a l modality (Doehring, 1968; Rudnick, Martin & S t e r r i t t , 1972; S t e r r i t t , Martin & Rudnick, 1971). This requires v i s u a l temporal to v i s u a l temporal integration (VT-VT). Between modality (cross-modal) integrations 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. This encompasses s i x further combinations of inter-sensory integrations: 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; Sterritt et a l . , 1971). Historically the divergent views on the essential contributions of audition and vision to processing information could be represented by 1. a modal specific view whereby each modality has specific and distinct patterns of transduction, specific neural location and functions and characteristic sensory and perceptual qualities, and 2. an opposing amodal, supramodal or nonmodal view where a unitary modal-processing of information occurs with unique modal qualities overlooked (Ettlinger, 1967; Freides, 1974). Although some elements of both views appear in literature on cross-modal function, the main approach taken by modality matching research infers a basically modal specific view with some degree of rapprochement in the area of sensory integration. Ettlinger (1967) presents something of these opposing positions in writing that i t is not known for certain whether a single process of recognition takes place in the one neural system regardless of sensory input mode, or i f recognition takes place in a specific modality for specific stimuli. It is this lack of certainty together with clear necessity for integration of sensory information in the process of reading that has contributed to the considerable amount of research in the area. Thus study of intra- and intersensory functioning for the auditory and visual channels is of significant value for the study of learning disorders and in particular in the understanding, classification 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 visual modalities in reading has been to compare the sensory integration a b i l i t i e s 9 of normal and retarded readers. B i r c h and Belmont (1964) were among the f i r s t to 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, using analogous v i s u a l s p a t i a l and a u d i t o r y temporal s t i m u l i c a l l i n g f o r cross-modal matching of the stimulus p a t t e r n s . Modality matching invol v e s the p r e s e n t a t i o n of a stimulus or standard p a t t e r n i n one modality followed by a comparison p a t t e r n i n a second modality, the subj e c t being r e q u i r e d to judge the equivalence or match of the two patterns. Matching of patterns i n the same modality i s designated intramodal matching (IMM). For two patterns presented i n d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s a cross-modal match (CMM) i s c a l l e d f o r . In that judging equivalence i s a requirement of the task, the subject i s aware that a r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s between the stimulus p a t t e r n s . Cross-modal matching (CMM) i s not to be confused w i t h cross-modal t r a n s f e r (CMT) which i n v o l v e s t r a n s f e r of a learned p r i n c i p l e from o r i g i n a l to concurrent or subsequent tasks ( B a i t e r & Fogarty, 1971; E t t l i n g e r , 1967; Goodnow, 1971a, 1971b; O'Conner & Hermelin, 1971). In CMT as d i s t i n c t from CMM the subject i s not made e x p l i c i t l y aware of any equivalence between the two t a s k s . While a considerable time i n t e r v a l may separate the two stimulus presentations i n CMT, f o r CMM the time i n t e r v a l i s r a r e l y longer than a few seconds. Another confusion among the r e s u l t s of CMM s t u d i e s has a l s o a r i s e n due to l a c k of intramodal c o n t r o l s (Bryant, 1968; Holloway, 1971; Jones, 1970; M i l n e r & Bryant, 1970; Rae, 1977; Rubinste i n & Gruenberg, 1971; von Wright, 1970). E x c l u s i o n of information on intramodal performance i s c r i t i c a l i n cross-modal i n t e g r a t i o n research s i n c e there i s no way of knowing i f poor performance i s due to f a i l u r e to i n t e g r a t e i n f o r m a t i o n or f a i l u r e to d i s c r i m i n a t e r e l e v a n t stimulus aspects i n e i t h e r or both of 10 the m o d a l i t i e s concerned. Lack of i n t r a m o d a l c o n t r o l s i s a l s o c r u c i a l i f development of cross-modal i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h age i s b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d . In such a case, age changes i n i n t e g r a t i o n cannot be s e p a r a t e d from improve- ments due to d e v e l o p i n g a b i l i t y 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 concerned. I n t r a m o d a l data i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h c r o s s - m o d a l d a t a p e r m i t some a n a l y s i s o f the performance of good and poor r e a d e r s . D i f f e r e n c e s i n s c a n n i n g , c o d i n g , o r memory o f the i n i t i a l s t i m u l i a r e taken i n t o a c c o u n t by i n t r a m o d a l and cross-modal d a t a comparisons. I t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e to a s s e s s the r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y o f the v a r i o u s i n t e g r a t i o n t a s k s i f the s t a n d a r d and comparison s t i m u l i a r e i d e n t i c a l i n each matching s i t u a t i o n . Such an assessment r e q u i r e s t h a t a l l s u b j e c t s perform a l l t a s k s . Recent m o d a l i t y matching r e s e a r c h p e r m i t s some degree of coming t o g e t h e r of t h e views t h a t emphasize e i t h e r r e c e p t o r mechanism (modal s p e c i f i c ) or h i g h e r c o r t i c a l p r o c e s s e s (nonmodal). The f i n d i n g s of F r e i d e s (1974) a r e foreshadowed i n Goodnow's (1971a) s u g g e s t i o n t h a t adjudged e q u i v a l e n c e depends on the e x t e n t of the c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between s e t s of p r o p e r t i e s sampled on the two o c c a s i o n s , and t h a t s u p e r i o r i t y o f any i n t e g r a - t i o n method w i l l depend upon the degree to which i t h i g h l i g h t s e s s e n t i a l p r o p e r t i e s . F r e i d e s (1974) c o n c l u d e s t h a t the nonmodal p o s i t i o n i s r e l e v a n t f o r s i m p l e r i n f o r m a t i o n l o a d s w h i l e the modal s p e c i f i c v i ew h o l d s l a r g e l y t r u e f o r the p r o c e s s i n g of complex p a t t e r n i n f o r m a t i o n . The i m p l i c a t i o n f o r r e a d i n g seems to be t h a t the more e a s i l y the s i g h t - s o u n d o r s o u n d - s i g h t c o r r e s p o n d e n c e i s a t t a i n e d , the more adequate the r e a d i n g performance w i l l be. I f i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t y f o r complex i n f o r m a t i o n can be demonstrated by poor r e a d e r s , i t s u g g e s t s t h a t some o t h e r i n t e r f e r e n c e i n e s t a b l i s h i n g the c o r r e s p o n d e n c e of the v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y s t i m u l i i n the r e a d i n g t a s k may l i e a t the base of poor r e a d i n g performance. 11 If the poor reader can integrate the simpler information but not the more complex, i t suggests that the child may be bound by i n i t i a l stimulus characteristics or lack a mediational f a c i l i t y or rule for establishing correspondence of cross-modal stimuli. If a strength in one of the modalities is 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 effects. This raises the question of spatial and temporal conditions of presentation as well as the place of memory in mediating the two conditions. Research to cl a r i f y some of these areas of partial 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 clar i f y some of the major issues arising 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 in designing Intramodal and cross-modal matching studies (see Table 1). Consideration of these variables serves to narrow the focus of 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 sufficiently examined by recent research. Since Birch and Belmont's (1964) original study has set the scene and has highlighted a number of major areas of contention, their study serves to introduce some factors which directly influence the design and purpose of this study. Table 1 Variables to be Considered in Modality Matching Research Mode of Stimuli Organism Mode of Response Intramodal Intermodal Simultaneous presentation Successive presentation Symbolic stimuli Nonsymbolic stimuli Intensity Number of units Rate Duration Interval Instructions Order Complexity Distortion Sex CA MA I.Q. Organic involvement Prior experience or training Intermodal Intramodal Symbolic a. motor b. vocal 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. recall e. equivalence f. correspondence g. recoding to a rule 13 The matching of analogous a u d i t o r y temporal (AT) and v i s u a l s p a t i a l (VS) s t i m u l i which B i r c h and Belmont (1964) employed has become known as the B i r c h and Belmont t e s t (see Figure 1) AUDITORY TAP PATTERNS VISUAL STIMULI EXAMPLES A •• • TEST ITEMS 2 • • • • •••• 3 • • • • • •••>• •••*>• 4 30 Figure 1. Test s t i m u l i used by B i r c h and Belmont. . A u d i t o r y patterns were tapped on a t a b l e top i n the subject's view a f t e r which the subj e c t chose the matching 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 cards. For nine and ten-year-old boys, good readers made s i g n i f i c a n t l y fewer e r r o r s than retarded readers, suggesting that they dealt more e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h tasks r e q u i r i n g a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l matching of s t i m u l i . Within the two reading groups there 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 reading a b i l i t y between those who were high 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 reading, and the place of memory, which they a l s o s t u d i e d , 14 w i l l be discussed i n l a t e r s e c t i o n s of t h i s review. They concluded that one of the c o n t r i b u t i n g f a c t o r s of reading d i f f i c u l t i e s was poor develop- ment of i n t e r s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n . A number of weaknesses were apparent i n t h e i r study and subsequent studies have attempted to remove those weaknesses., u n f o r t u n a t e l y i n the process adding 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 which 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 which r e p l i c a t e d those weaknesses, are the f o l l o w i n g : (a) low c e i l i n g of the t e s t ( B i r c h & Belmont, 1965; Holloway, 1971; Klapper & B i r c h , 1971; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; R e i l l y , 1971), (b) lack of c o n t r o l of v i s u a l cues during the tapping p a t t e r n s , thus confusing a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l s t i m u l i and intramodal with cross-modal matching ( B i r c h & Belmont, 1965; Holloway, 1971; 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); (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 of the AT s t i m u l i (Becker & Sabatino, 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) unrepresentative samples ( B i r c h & 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) l a c k of data on the r e l i a b i l i t y of the t e s t , p a r t i c u l a r l y .in the l i g h t of the small number of items ( s i x to ten) (Beery, 1967; B i r c h & Belmont, 1965; Kuhlman & Wolking, 1972; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick, S t e r r i t t & 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 the v i s u a l ,to a u d i t o r y aspect of reading (Ford, 1967; .Jones, 1970; Kahn & B i r c h , 1968; Rae, 1977; 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). In a d d i t i o n , a number of s t u d i e s have confused the temporal- s p a t i a l aspects of perception v i a the v i s u a l modality. These weaknesses, together w i t h some of the attempts made to c o n t r o l them, and major v a r i a b l e s 15 to be c o n s i d e r e d ( a f t e r C h a l f a n t & S c h e f f e l i n , 1969) w i l l be summarized l a t e r i n t h i s r e v i e w . Not a l l o f t h e many s t u d i e s on CMM and IMM have r e l a t e d s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n to r e a d i n g p r o c e s s e s o r d i f f i c u l t i e s . Those s t u d i e s which d i d i n c l u d e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f the r e l a t i o n of AVI to r e a d i n g , d i d so i n a v a r i e t y of manners. The o r i g i n a l B i r c h and Belmont (1964) st u d y used p r e v i o u s l y s e l e c t e d groups o f good and poor r e a d e r s as s u b j e c t s f o r comparison. T h i s method was a l s o used by Beery (1967), Bryden (1972) and Vande V o o r t , Senf and Benton (1972) . A second type o f approach was to t e s t t h e c h i l d r e n f o r r e a d i n g a b i l i t i e s b e f o r e , ( B i r c h & Belmont, 1965; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick, S t e r r i t t & F l a x , 1967), a f t e r , ( F o r d , 1967; Kahn & B i r c h , 1968; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966) o r sometime (Rae, 1977; R e i l l y , 1971) i n r e l a t i o n to t h e AVI t e s t i n g , t r e a t i n g r e a d i n g a b i l i t y as a continuum r a t h e r than d i v i d i n g s u b j e c t s i n t o groups. Other major s t u d i e s d i d n o t a s s e s s r e a d i n g a b i l i t i e s . Of the s t u d i e s which a s s e s s e d r e a d i n g , a v a r i e t y o f a s p e c t s and s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s were used. B i r c h and Belmont (1964) used measures of 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 . Beery (1967) d i v i d e d s u b j e c t s on t h e b a s i s o f o r a l r e a d i n g b u t compared groups on AVI a b i l i t y . B i r c h and Belmont (1965) used a v a i l a b l e r e a d i n g r e a d i n e s s measures f o r grade one c h i l d r e n and whatever measures were a v a i l a b l e f o r some of the o l d e r s u b j e c t s . AVI a b i l i t y was c o r r e l a t e d w i t h r e a d i n g and r e a d i n g r e a d i n e s s . S t e r r i t t and Rudnick (1966) and Rudnick e t a l . (1967) r e l a t e d AVI to r e a d i n g comprehension, Kahn and B i r c h (1968) to word knowledge and comprehension, and Muehl and Kremenak (1966) to p r e - r e a d i n g r e a d i n e s s s u b t e s t s and r e a d i n g achievement a y e a r l a t e r . F o r d (1967) r e l a t e d i n t e g r a t i o n to paragraph r e a d i n g and words i n i s o l a t i o n w h i l e Vande 16 V o o r t and Senf (1973) used o n l y the words i n i s o l a t i o n . Some t e n o r more d i f f e r e n t t e s t s were used, g i v i n g a wide v a r i e t y o f measures, t h e most commonly used b e i n g the Gates M a c G i n i t i e Reading T e s t s . In a d d i t i o n to t h e v a r i a t i o n s i n the r e a d i n g measures, the ages o f s u b j e c t s v a r i e d from p r e - s c h o o l e r s to a d u l t s , w i t h the most common groups as f o l l o w s (numbers o f s t u d i e s i n p a r e n t h e s e s ) : K, K-2, K-3, K-4, K-6(2), grade 1 ( 2 ) , 1-4, 2-6, 3, 3-4, 3-7(2), 4 (3) and 5. At l e a s t seven of the major s t u d i e s used boys as s u b j e c t s w h i l e i n twelve or more the s u b j e c t s were boys and g i r l s . 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 groups were i n c l u d e d and a number of I.Q. ranges. F o r s e v e r a l s t u d i e s the mean I.Q. was 120 or above. Thus i t i s d i f f i c u l t to i n t e r p r e t the r e s u l t s as f a r as d e v e l o p i n g a c l e a r p i c t u r e o f the c o n t r i b u t i o n of s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n to r e a d i n g performance. While t h e g e n e r a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between AVI and r e a d i n g i s f a i r l y w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d , a breakdown of the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f the components o f c r o s s - modal and i n t r a m o d a l i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h s k i l l s o f r e a d i n g s t i l l needs f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h . The major f i n d i n g s o f those s t u d i e s which r e l a t e d s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n to r e a d i n g a r e summarized as f o l l o w s : 1. Cross-modal matching a b i l i t y was h i g h e r f o r b e t t e r r e a d e r s ( B i r c h & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Beery, 1967; Bryden, 1972; Fo r d , 1967; Jones, 1970; Kahn and B i r c h , 1967; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rae, 1977; R e i l l y , 1971; Rudnick e t a l . , 1967; Sharan & C a l f e e , 1977; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966; Vande V o o r t e t a l . , (1972). With the e x c e p t i o n o f B i r c h and Belmont (1965) the v a r i o u s s t u d i e s showed t h a t t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p h e l d f o r a l l g rades up to grade s i x . The d e c l i n e o f s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p f o r h i g h e r grades i n B i r c h and Belmont (1965) i s q u e s t i o n a b l e s i n c e c e i l i n g e f f e c t s r educed v a r i a n c e o f s c o r e s and thus d e c r e a s e d the c o r r e l a t i o n s . F i n d i n g s o f o t h e r s t u d i e s a l s o opposed B i r c h and Belmont's c o n c l u s i o n . 17 2. While some st u d i e s r e l a t e d i n t e g r a t i o n to reading i n general, B i r c h 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 reading. 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 sensory i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h word knowledge and comprehension, Ford (1967) with two measures each of vocabulary and o r a l reading, 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 vocabulary and compre- hension, Vande Voort et a l . (1972) with words i n i s o l a t i o n , and Bryden (1972) with a composite of vocabulary, speed and accuracy and comprehension. _3. With the e f f e c t s of i n t e l l i g e n c e taken i n t o account or adequately 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 to reading ( B i r c h & Belmont, 1964; Beery, 1967; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick et a l . , 1967; S t e r r i t & Rudnick, 1966). Ford (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 . Jones (1970) and Kahn and B i r c h (1968) found that 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 compre- hension and AVI c o r r e l a t i o n s tended to lo s e t h e i r s i g n i f i c a n c e . Jorgensen and Hyde (1974) found AVI c o r r e l a t e d 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. constant, found p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s between reading and matching, w i t h values of .14 f o r good readers and .60 f o r poor readers, concluding that the r e l a t i o n of reading to modality matching was n o n - l i n e a r . 4. Various cross-modal matching tasks are s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of reading performance. These i n c l u d e A-VS, accounting f o r 11 and 23 percent of reading variance r e s p e c t i v e l y , i n Rudnick et a l (1967) and S t e r r i t t and Rudnick (1966). In the Rudnick et a l . (1967) study, VT-VS accounted f o r 14 percent of the reading v a r i a n c e . Muehl and Kremenak (1966) found that 18 only VS-A and A-VS contributed as significant predictors of grade one reading. For reading readiness they found only letter naming was a signi- ficant, predictor of later reading, and VS-A and A-VS correlated significantly with letter naming. Beery (1967) found that VS-A matching discriminated between good and poor readers. She also concluded that either VS-A or A-VS was equally useful in 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 A-A, VT-A, VT-VS, and VS-VT give significant differences between good and poor readers. In examining the influence of the dominant parietal cortex on A-VS CMM tasks and VS-VS and A-A intramodal matching, Butters and Brody (1968) found specific localizations in the dominant hemisphere for cross-modal and intramodal integrations and concluded that AVI capacities serve as pre- requisites for attainment of reading s k i l l s . Although there is 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 Re l i a b i l i t y Although significant relationships were found among the variables studied (Birch & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Klapper & Birch, 1971; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Reilly, 1971), low ceiling effects make some of the results questionable. Levelling-off effects of AVI a b i l i t i e s with increasing age were particularly influenced by predominance of easy items. Easy items also caused skewed results and reduced va r i a b i l i t y of scores, with resulting 19 i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c s . Beery (1967), Ford (1967) and Kahn and B i r c h (1968) increased the number of items i n the B i r c h and Belmont t e s t from 10 to 20 i n order to give greater c e i l i n g and r e l i a b i l i t y . Subsequently, Bryden (1972), Rae (1977), R e i l l y (1971), Sharan and Calfee (1977), and Vande Voort, Senf and Benton (1972) employed 20 items i n t h e i r modality matching s t u d i e s . Becker and Sabatino (1971), Rudnick, M a r t i n and S t e r r i t t (1972) and S t e r r i t t , M a r t i n and Rudnick (1971) added two items to extend e i t h e r the c e i l i n g , or i n the case of Becker and Sabatino the f l o o r , of the t e s t s . The most obvious e f f e c t of increased numbers of items was to r a i s e the asymptote found by B i r c h and Belmont (1964) at the Grade 5 l e v e l . Kahn and B i r c h (1967) using a 20 item extension of the AVI t e s t w i t h unseen tapping of the AT p a t t e r n obtained t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t i e s 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 other s t u d i e s have reported r e l i a b i l i t y data f o r the AVI t e s t , Becker and Sabatino (1971) concluded that the B i r c h and Belmont AVI t e s t could provide 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 tapping a c t i o n concealed from s u b j e c t s ' view. For ages f i v e , s i x , seven and eight the t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s were r e s p e c t i v e l y .34, .90, .92, .75. Rae (1977) w i t h nine" and ten year olds i n s m a l l group s e t t i n g s used a modified v e r s i o n of the B i r c h and Belmont t e s t extended to twenty items. He obtained a r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t of .82 using the Kuder-Richardson twenty formula. Ford (1967) pointed out the c o n t i n u i n g need not only f o r more c l e a r cross-modal tasks, but a l s o f o r a t t e n t i o n to be given t o , " - . - the more mundane psychometric c r i t e r i a of r e l i a b i l i t y and sample s i z e s " (p. 840). 20 P r e s e n t a t i o n of A u d i t o r y Temporal S t i m u l i The o r i g i n a l method of tapping the a u d i t o r y p a t t e r n i n f u l l view of the subjects added a v i s u a l component which l a t e r s tudies t r i e d to remove. Ford (1967), Goodnow (1971a), Kahn and B i r c h (1968) and Becker and Sabatino (1971) employed an unseen tapping system, under the t a b l e w i t h arm and shoulder movements concealed. As e a r l y as 1966 S t e r r i t t and Rudnick introduced taped a u d i t o r y tone beeps of 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 systematized 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 using a B e l l and Howell Language Master and louspeaker connection to a soundproof room. The tones were 500 c y c l e s per second. Vande Voort, Senf and Benton (1972) a l s o used the Language Master w i t h 1000 Hz tones. Muehl and Kremenak (1966) removed the v i s u a l element by using a telegraph key, s t i l l manually operated. This method was l a t e r used by Bryden (1972), Klapper and B i r c h (1971), and Kuhlman and Wolking (1972) . The technique employed by S t e r r i t t e t a l . (1971) and Rudnick et a l . (1972) presented 1000 Hz and 1200 Hz tones v i a headphones, the two frequencies being used to separate the standard and comparison s t i m u l i . F i n a l l y Jarman (1977a, 1977b, 1978) and Rae (1977) used tape recorded tones of 1000 Hz and 800 Hz r e s p e c t i v e l y . While a v a r i e t y of s t i m u l i lengths and i n t e r v a l durations were used, the, m a j o r i t y used a beep d u r a t i o n of about .15 to .25 sees, a short i n t e r v a l of .35 to .5 sees and a long i n t e r v a l of 1 to 1.35 sees. The times between p a i r s of s t i m u l i have u s u a l l y ranged from one to two seconds, w i t h longer periods 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 to know the 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 , the methodology v a r i a b i l i t y and confusion of v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y input have, by these methods, been more adequately c o n t r o l l e d . 21 The confusion of spatial and temporal dimensions in the earlier studies occurred in the matching of VS and AT patterns, thus calling for two types of integration, auditory to visual and temporal to spatial. The Rudnick et a l . (1972) and Sterritt et a l . (1971) studies represented the f i r s t attempt to differentiate these factors in modality matching. A number of studies including Rubinstein and Gruenberg (1971) had observed the need for control of spatial-temporal transformations and also the need for study of the complement of A-V integration (V-A) and of the intramodal pairings, A-A and V-V. To make valid 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 different sets of stimulus items for 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 (1971) changed a l l the patterns to include the same number of elements, including a l l temporal combinations, the only identification required being the location of the long interval among the stimuli. They used fast and slow presentations, with adult subjects, for the four combinations, AT-AT, VT-VT, AT-VT, VT-AT. They found VT patterns more d i f f i c u l t to match than AT and cross-modal matches as easy as intramodal for a slow rate of presentation. For a fast rate of presentation cross-modal matches were more d i f f i c u l t . Symmetric standard patterns were easier to match than asymmetric. Thus the Rudnick et a l . (1972) and Sterritt et al.(1971) studies marked a significant step in generating a l l nine possible combinations of 22 stimulus and response p a t t e r n s , covering a l l dimensions of i n t e g r a t i o n . Using headphones, lamps, p r i n t e d dots and a same/different response format, they included AT-VS, VS-AT, AT-VT, VT-AT, VT-VS, VS-VT, AT-AT, VS-VS and VT-VT matchings. They found the AV and TS i n t e g r a t i o n s were s i m i l a r i n d i f f i c u l t y to r e s p e c t i v e intramodal i n t e g r a t i o n s . E a s i e s t tasks were v i s u a l s p a t i a l matchings, 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 temporal matchings and most d i f f i c u l t were purely temporal matchings. V i s u a l and a u d i t o r y modality 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 f o r 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 t e m p o r a l - s p a t i a l dimension. A p l a u s i b l e c o n c l u s i o n could be that poor CMM performance i n previous s t u d i e s may have been due 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 than v i s u a l - a u d i t o r y . The Goodnow (1971a) and Klapper and B i r c h (1971) st u d i e s produced s i m i l a r f i n d i n g s . The question r a i s e d by the modality 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 best approached by v i s i o n and temporal pe r c e p t i o n best served by a u d i t i o n . O'Connor and Hermelin (1971, 1972) concluded that the input modality determines the conceptual o r g a n i z a t i o n of space r a t h e r than the p h y s i c a l . T h e i r 1972 study showed the v i s u a l items were organized s p a t i a l l y and a u d i t o r y items organized temporally. When s p a t i a l and temporal s t i m u l i were presented simultaneously the modality of input determined the perceptual o r g a n i z a t i o n . Kuhlman and WoIking (1972) drew much the same co n c l u s i o n i n saying the IMM and CMM tasks were not s i g n i f i - c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t when both begin w i t h the same modality. T h i s p o i n t s 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 standard and comparison c o n d i t i o n s f o r 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 . The Rudnick et a l . (1972) and S t e r r i t t et 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 subjects were : impoverished b l a c k and chicano kindergarten 23 and f i r s t grade c h i l d r e n . Questions 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 mediation i n matching or i n temporal 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 view that modality c h a r a c t e r - i s t i c s mediated sensory matching was r e j e c t e d by Blank and Bridger (1964) i n favour of higher order processes. As i n d i c a t e d from the Rudnick et a l . (1972) and S t e r r i t t e t a l . (1971) s t u d i e s , the r o l e of language appears to 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 understanding modality matching. The r o l e of language i s l i k e l y to vary from task to task and adequate v e r b a l i z a t i o n i s probably not 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 occur (Blank & B r i d g e r , 1964; O'Connor & Hermelin, 1971). E t t l i n g e r (1967) p o i n t s out that CMM may occur w i t h or without the a i d of v e r b a l i z a t i o n and may take place a t a p e r c e p t u a l l e v e l without v e r b a l mediation. The question seems not to be whether language i s necessary f o r modality matching a b i l i t y but r a t h e r , i n what ways i t may be used to f a c i l i t a t e performance (von Wright, 1970). Jones and Robinson (1973) considered that i n CMM, subjects may be f o r c e d to use v e r b a l coding as mediation between m o d a l i t i e s , which helps to account f o r v i s u a l - v i s u a l tasks being e a s i e s t . Blank and Bridger (1966) attempted to separate 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 cross-modal l e a r n i n g , using the deaf to c o n t r o l f o r language. They concluded t h a t the deaf performed as w e l l as the hearing because they had number concepts which could be expressed k i n a e s t h e t i c a l l y i f not i n language. In a f u r t h e r attempt to c o n t r o l f o r language, Belmont, B i r c h and Belmont (1968) used b r a i n damaged p a t i e n t s w i t h and without language aphasia. They found no support f o r the view that CMM was dependent on v e r b a l mediation, supporting the Blank and 24 Bridger conclusion that language may be a hindrance to processing some types of sensory information. Kahn and Birch (1968) proposed that factors such as visual or auditory discrimination, auditory memory or verbal labels for 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 six subjects in an extended item AVI test. They employed the following categories (with percentage of use in subjects' responses in parentheses): (1) counting variations (48%) (a) counting with pauses (b) grouping (c) grouping with a word for pauses (2) attempts to visualize the pattern before comparison (15%) (3) instinctive gestalt-proprioceptive feeling (5%) (4) no known technique (32%). Ability to apply labels did not influence AVI i n a positive way. The use of counting procedures showed lowest AVI scores while attempted visualization tended to produce high AVI scores. Having no apparent method produced comparable results to use of verbalized methods. This finding that visualized schematization of temporal patterns mediates matching better than any other method, while surprising, i s consistent with discussion arising out of the confusion of spatial and temporal elements and dealt with by Rudnick et a l . (1972) and Sterrit et a l . (1971). These studies concluded that auditory-visual and temporal- spatial integrations were not higher order a b i l i t i e s . Children who visualized auditory patterns had a ready schema for comparison in the spatial modality aspect of matching and thus had virtually made the match before the presentation of the VS stimuli. This was not so for those who used a numerical coding system. Numerical coding was found to be increasingly used in relation to length of stimulus patterns and intervals 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). Age changes were al s o r e f l e c t e d by changes i n informat i o n s e l e c t e d f o r coding. The s i m p l i f i c a t i o n of coding 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. This seems to t i e i n w i t h the process 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. This n o t i o n 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 the v i s u a l - a u d i t o r y and temporal-spatial i n t e g r a t i o n s i n v o l v e d i n e a r l y reading tasks. In the words of Bannatyne (1968): In l e a r n i n g to read, c h i l d r e n l e a r n to a s s o c i a t e sound-labels w i t h v i s u a l - l a b e l s (and v i c e versa) on both a g e s t a l t whole-word b a s i s and on a phoneme- grapheme 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 that 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 are best used s e l e c t i v e l y and interchangeably as the i n t e g r a t i o n task changes i n terms of the modality of p r e s e n t a t i o n of the i n i t i a l stimulus and the complexity of the s t i m u l i , as Friedes (1974) suggests. The f a c t o r of meaningfulness of the stimulus m a t e r i a l might p o s s i b l y be of i n f l u e n c e . Groenendaal and Bakker (1971) i n v e s t i g a t e d the r o l e of mediation i n r e t e n t i o n of temporal sequence and found that good v e r b a l mediators perceived and r e t a i n e d temporal sequences of meaningful f i g u r e s b e t t e r than non-mediators w i t h the groups being equal f o r meaningless f i g u r e 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 to good and poor readers (Bakker, 1967), w i t h good readers able to r e t a i n meaningful f i g u r e sequences b e t t e r . R e s u l t s l e d to the conclusion that such data on mediation and r e t e n t i o n apply to the mechanical reading process at e a r l i e r stages of reading. I f meaningfulness of m a t e r i a l a i d s i n pe r c e p t i o n of temporal order t h i s supports the idea of mediation f o r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n of temporal 26 order matching. The simplicity of symmetrical temporal patterns may account for easier matching (Rubinstein Si Gruenberg, 1971). Thus for poor readers, adequate language does not help them in modality matching, when a d i f f i c u l t y in handling temporally and sequentially ordered information is the main d i f f i c u l t y for such readers (Bryden, 1972; Doehring, 1968; Leong, 1976, Note 1) . Memory in Modality Matching A number of references have been made to the place of memory. Birch and Belmont's original study found that children with low and high AVI scores were not significantly different in memory ab i l i t y as tested by the Digit 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 significant relationship to AVI for auditory memory but a tentative significant relationship between visual sequential memory and AVI for grade two boys. Goodnow (1971a) controlled for memory effects by including checks on memory for the original series and by providing a no-memory test, with the pattern always available. She found that matching di 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 in matching both when the original 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) in 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 for reading deficits, Vande Voort, Senf and Benton (1972) had earlier found no main effect for interstimulus interval, thus concluding that i t was not possible to ascertain whether poor memory differentiates 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 for poor sensory integration of poor readers. Developmental Trends and Matching Difficulty 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 later shown to be ceiling effects and improvement in AVI appears to continue at least until grade six. Limitations of test instruments make data on the developmental trend of cross-modal matching abi l i t y somewhat tenuous. Both IMM and CMM appear to follow a similar developmental trend which is f a i r l y well established and replicable (Goodnow, 1971a, 1971b). The question of when and how these ab i l i t i e s are related to reading is less clear. The range of studies indicate them to be significantly related from K to grade six with the suggestion that after 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 for normal readers and to the relative maturation of visual and auditory perceptual a b i l i t i e s by this stage. On the matter of the relative 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 to be true (Goodnow, 1971b) w h i l e some have found the reverse (Muehl & Kremenak, 1966) or equal d i f f i c u l t y ( S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971). Kuhlman and Wolking (1972) would add t h a t IMM and CMM are not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t only when both begin w i t h the same modality. Some degree of confusion 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 of methodology, instrumentation and research design. In s p i t e of these i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s there are some general trends that can be d i s t i n g u i s h e d . The Rudnick et a l . (1972) and 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 at a greater degree of d e t a i l . Muehl and Kremenak found V-V to be e a s i e s t , A-V and V-A intermediate and A-A hardest i n d i f f i c u l t y . The Rudnick and 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, A-VS, VS-VT, •v VT-VS intermediate and A-VT, VT-A, VT-VT, and A-A most d i f f i c u l t . Thus pure s p a t i a l matching was e a s i e s t , mixed temporal and s p a t i a l intermediate and pure temporal matching was hardest. I n c r e a s i n g stimulus length 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 matter of r e l a t i v e task d i f f i c u l t y Bryden (1972) has some strong conclusions though data were c o l l a p s e d across 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 tasks rather than blocks of s i m i l a r standard to comparison matches. He found that i f the f i r s t p a t t e r n i s a s p a t i a l one (VS) the task i s easy. I f the f i r s t task i s a temporal one (A or VT) the matching i s harder. The same trend 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 that VS p a t t e r n s are e a s i e r to remember and thus to compare. In answering the question whether c r o s s - modal matches are harder than intramodal matches, or whether temporal p r e s e n t a t i o n makes the d i f f e r e n c e , Bryden concluded that cross-modal matches are more d i f f i c u l t , s h i f t s of timing more d i f f i c u l t than s h i f t s across modality and that adding a cross-modal 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 task more d i f f i c u l t . Sex and SES E f f e c t s In c o l l a p s i n g data across sexes, Bryden re-introduced the question of sex d i f f e r e n c e s . There are unquestionable sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n reading a b i l i t y (Dwyer, 1973; Ford, 1967). The p o s i t i o n w i t h regard to AVI however i s not so c l e a r . Although Jorgensen and Hyde (1974), Muehl and Kremenak (1966), Rae (1977), R e i l l y (1971) and Sharan and C a l f e e (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 Jorgensen 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 reading. None of the f i v e s t udies mentioned, however, used more than four of the nine p o s s i b l e modality matching combinations, and two of the s t u d i e s used the B i r c h and Belmont method of tapped (and thus, seen) a u d i t o r y p a t t e r n s . Only Jarman ( i n press) and Bryden (1972) used a l l nine combinations and both of these s t u d i e s found no sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n AVI a b i l i t y . Several of the p r e v i o u s l y mentioned studies had c e i l i n g e f f e c t s which may have masked sex d i f f e r e n c e s . In these st u d i e s there were al s o d i f f e r e n c e s i n age, race and the content of the t e s t s . Three of the f i v e s t u d i e s used su 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. Although not i n c l u d e d i n Chalfant 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 , SES 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 consider i n modality matching s t u d i e s . Jorgensen and Hyde (1974) concluded that SES 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 l o w e r - c l a s s c h i l d r e n and should be considered when i n t e r p r e t i n g AVI research. Sharan and C a l f e e (1977) w i t h second, t h i r d and f o u r t h grade I s r a e l i 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 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 is well known to have significant relationship to measured intelligence, i t appears to be an important factor in reading and AVI research. Intelligence and Modality Matching Although measured intelligence played an important part in the findings of Birch and Belmont's original study (1964), and has been included as a variable i n most later studies, i t s effects have not always been controlled- for in relating 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. The difference*- in mean I.Q. for low and high AVI groups was significant for 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 significantly related to reading over and above shared intelligence. With methodological improvements, later studies found correlations of I.Q. with AVI ranging from .34 (Ford, 1967) to .53 (Sterritt and Rudnick, 1966). Later studies of course included more cross-modal and intramodal combinations for correlation with intelligence. The Ford (1967) and Kahn and Birch (1968) studies with intelligence controlled produced opposing findings. 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 significantly related. Jarman (1977b, 1978) found that A-VS matching discriminated most strongly among three intelligence groups at four grade levels, compared to VS-VS, A-A, VS-A°and a group of other perceptual and memory tests. Factor analyses showed clearly different 31 strategies on modality matching tasks for the three I.Q. groups. Jorgensen and Hyde (1974) using correlational techniques found no significant correlations between intelligence and AVI but results were probably confounded by SES.factors. After partialing for intelligence, AVI and vocabulary retained a significant relationship. Rae (1977) found that intersensory integration correlated significantly with both nonverbal I.Q. and reading achievement (.68 and .56 respectively). With intelligence controlled, AVI remained significantly correlated with reading but accounted for on^y 4 percent of reading variance. From these tests i t is clear that the relationship of modality matching to reading and intelligence i s complicated and differences in findings may result from design variations and test differences. It is clear from the Jarman studies that more qualitative analysis of cognitive and intellective strategies in 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 in 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 verify, 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 in reading 32 experienced by so many children, especially boys, beginning in the early grades. Reading abi l i t y underlies success in most areas of study and vocation, with major implications in the communication of knowledge and as a leisure pastime. Understanding of the reading process is of central importance for teaching methods, diagnosis of d i f f i c u l t y and for inter- vention in 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 visual and auditory modalities Early reading is seen as involving integration of visual, spatial, auditory and temporal information and involving a matching of visual and sound labels for both whole word and part word stimulus elements. The sensory and inter- 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 is consider to be a valid and necessary area for research (Jones, 1970; Jorgensen & Hyde 1974). A l l evidence suggests that there is a continuing need for early identification of children deficient in a b i l i t y to integrate auditory and visual information (Muehl & Kremenak, 1966). Since A-VS integration tests appear useful in both predicting reading d i f f i c u l t y and discriminating normal and poor readers, even with intelligence controlled, further research would seem to be productive (Beery, 1967). Lack of standardized instruments and variations in methodology, sample selection and research foci have led to conflicting findings in modality research related to reading (Silverston & Deichmann, 1975). Ceiling effects produced by too few and too easy items in 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 spatial and temporal aspects of visual stimuli in matching tasks has further contributed to confused findings. Only in some of the more recent studies have a l l combinations of intramodal and cross-modal matching been included and in 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) in 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 latter weaknesses. In particular, interaction effects need to be more adequately investigated for the temporal, spatial, visual and auditory elements of the standard and comparison conditions. The method of stimulus presentation in the Bryden study appears to have confused this aspect of modality matching. Although the broad factors of intelligence and auditory-visual integration are clearly related to reading a b i l i t y , more detailed and qualitative analyses of intellective strategies and interaction effects of auditory, temporal, visual and spatial stimulus orderings as they relate 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 visual animal just as some theories equate human information processing with verbal thinking. These are one-sided views. Human beings are both visual and auditory, spatial and temporal, integrating 34 and differentiating. It follows that research designs should include specification or control of the information to be processed, the adeptness of the input modality for dealing with the information, and the modality response biases of the individual. (Freides, 1974, p. 303) This study investigates the auditory and visual, 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 in this review of the literature. 35 CHAPTER I I I PROBLEM the process of i n v e s t i g a t i o n , and t h e r e f o r e the growth of knowledge, never ends. L. J . Cronbach (p. 503) Statement of the Problem From the foregoing review i t was considered necessary to f u r t h e r study 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 temporal i n t e g r a t i o n to reading. A u s e f u l method of doing t h i s i s to compare the sensory 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 of above average and below average readers. Sensory i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s could thus be expressed i n terms of a b i l i t y at s p a t i a l and temporal, cross-modal and intramodal, matching t a s k s . The problem centers around three fundamental questions which a r i s e from the reviewed l i t e r a t u r e . 1. Are above average and below average readers 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 of performance on tasks r e q u i r i n g the i n t e g r a t i o n of cross-modal, intramodal, s p a t i a l and temporal information? 2. For above average and below average readers, what are the r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s of sensory i n t e g r a t i o n s i n terms of a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and temporal elements and t h e i r order of presentation? 3. Are above average and below average readers 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 processes i n the i n t e g r a t i o n of cross-modal, intramodal, s p a t i a l and temporal information? 36 R a t i o n a l e The r a t i o n a l e f o r e x a m i n a t i o n of the s e n s o r y 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 r e a d e r s a r i s e s out of two main c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . The f i r s t i s t h a t r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t y i s o f major c o n c e r n f o r anyone i n v o l v e d i n the p r o c e s s of e d u c a t i o n , w i t h r a m i f i c a t i o n s t h a t i n f l u e n c e a l l walks and s t a g e s of l i f e . Many of the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n v o l v e d i n e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e causes of r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t y a r i s e from i n c o m p l e t e knowledge of the p r o c e s s e s of r e a d i n g . In o r d e r f o r more adequate u n d e r s t a n d i n g , p r e v e n t i o n , d i a g n o s i s and r e m e d i a t i o n of r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s , c o n t i n u e d r e s e a r c h i n t o the e a r l y f o u n d a t i o n s and p r o c e s s e s o f r e a d i n g i s v i t a l l y i m p o r t a n t . The second c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s t h a t s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n appears t o be i n t r i n s i c a l l y f o u n d a t i o n a l t o the p r o c e s s o f l e a r n i n g t o r e a d . The more r e c e n t s t u d i e s (Bryden, 1972; F r e i d e s , 1974, 1975; Jarman, i n p r e s s , 1977b, 1978; Rae, 1977; Rudnick, M a r t i n & S t e r r i t t , 1972; Sharan & C a l f e e , 1977; S i l v e r s t o n & Deichmann, 1975) have begun to draw out some of the i n t r i c a c i e s of s e n s o r y m o d a l i t y dynamics which a r e i n v o l v e d i n v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and temporal i n t e g r a t i o n s i n m o d a l i t y matching t a s k s . Q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s i n the ways c h i l d r e n p r o c e s s the same, v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and temporal i n f o r m a t i o n can be viewed not s i m p l y as a b i l i t i e s but more p o s s i b l y as c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g i e s o r adeptness i n a p p l y i n g the most e f f e c t i v e s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n performance as r e q u i r e d by t h e n a t u r e of the s t i m u l u s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and t a s k demands. U s i n g t h i s k i n d of approach t h e v a r i o u s elements of t a s k s eg. c o m b i n a t i o n s of v i s u a l , s p a t i a l , a u d i t o r y and temporal i n t e g r a t i o n s , may be viewed as c o n t r o l l e d e x p e r i m e n t a l s i t u a t i o n s f o r the o b s e r v a t i o n of d i f f e r i n g e x p e r t i s e and s t r a t e g y as c a l l e d f o r by the c o n t e n t of the t a s k . The r e c e n t s t u d i e s 37 have begun to approach m o d a l i t y matching r e s e a r c h from these k i n d s o f t h e o r e t i c a l bases which c a r r y w i t h them, i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r m e t h o d o l o g i c a l r e v i e w or m o d i f i c a t i o n . I n h e r e n t i n the f o r e g o i n g , and c a r r y i n g o v e r i n t o r e s e a r c h d e s i g n i s the q u e s t i o n o f t h e co n f o u n d i n g o f s p a t i a l and temporal dimensions and the q u e s t i o n of i n t r a m o d a l a d e p t n e s s . I t i s c l e a r l y e s s e n t i a l to a s s e s s c r o s s - modal i n t e g r a t i o n from the b a s e l i n e o f i n t r a m o d a l f u n c t i o n i n g . I t i s a l s o c l e a r l y n e c e s s a r y to i n c l u d e a l l p o s s i b l e combinations o f a u d i t o r y , v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and temporal, i n t r a m o d a l and cross-modal s e n s o r y i n t e g r a - t i o n s i n o r d e r to make adequate 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 p r o c e s s e s and i n t e l l e c t u a l f u n c t i o n i n g of the s u b j e c t s . To do so w i t h a p r i o r i sub grou p i n g s i s a l s o d e s i r a b l e ( F r e i d e s , 1974). That such s t e p s were not taken c o n s i s t e n t l y has been shown i n the reviewed l i t e r a t u r e . When r e l i a b i l i t y was improved by i n c r e a s i n g the number o f items, not a l l combinations of matching t a s k s were used (Beery, 1967; Kahn & B i r c h , 1968). When the complement of A-VS was used p l u s i n t r a m o d a l c o n t r o l s , the number of items was d e c r e a s e d to s i x but s p a t i a l and temporal dimensions were confounded (Muehl & Kremenak, 1966). When a l l n i n e c o m b i n a t i o n s were used the study was not r e l a t e d to r e a d i n g and few items were i n c l u d e d i n each t a s k (Rudnick, M a r t i n & S t e r r i t t , 1972). A l t h o u g h s e v e r a l s t u d i e s r e p o r t no sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n development of p e r c e p t u a l m o d a l i t i e s and matching performance (Bryden, 1972; Rae, 1977; Snyder & Pope, 1972), t h e r e a r e w e l l r e c o g n i z e d sex 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 (Bentzen, 1963; Dwyer, 1973; Johnson, 1973; N o r f l e e t , 1973; Wallbrown, Wallbrown, E n g i n & B l a h a , 1975). Because of m e t h o d o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n matching s t u d i e s which r e p o r t no sex d i f f e r e n c e s , i t was d e c i d e d to s t u d y t h e r e a d i n g and m o d a l i t y matching of boys and g i r l s a t the t h i r d grade l e v e l . T h i r d grade s u b j e c t s were chosen f o r t h r e e main 38 reasons. (1) Several of the s t u d i e s w i t h methodological inadequacies studied c h i l d r e n of t h i s age, (2) i t seems l i k e l y that by the end of grade three, perceptual aspects of reading s t a r t to give place to more compre- hension-centered reading f o r meaning (Bond & T i n k e r , 1973), and (3) there i s evidence to suggest that optimal perceptual development occurs by the age of e i g h t years (Buktenica, 1970). Thus as was i n d i c a t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e review, v a r i a t i o n s i n instrumen- t a t i o n , i n c o n t r o l of stimulus p r e s e n t a t i o n , i n subject v a r i a b l e s (sex, age, sample s i z e , I.Q. ranges e t c . ) , i n research design and f o c i , have l e f t doubts as to the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of the f i n d i n g s . I t was w i t h t h i s r a t i o n a l e that t h i s study was undertaken. Hypotheses From the l i t e r a t u r e review and the three fundamental questions which introduced the r a t i o n a l e f o r the study, the f o l l o w i n g hypotheses presented themselves. Question 1 Are above average and below average readers 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 of performance on tasks r e q u i r i n g the i n t e g r a t i o n of cross-modal, intramodal, s p a t i a l and temporal information? Hypothesis 1 Above average readers 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 to below average readers i n performance on s p a t i a l , temporal, 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 readers, what are the r e l a t i v e 39 d i f f i c u l t y levels of sensory integrations in terms of auditory and visual, spatial and temporal elements and their order of presentation? Hypothesis 2.1 There w i l l be significant differences in relative task d i f f i c u l t y among the matching tasks within reading a b i l i t y levels. Hypothesis 2.2 There w i l l be significant interaction effects involving reading level and the visual, auditory, spatial and temporal elements for different orders of presentation in the standard and comparison positions. Question 3 Are above average and below average readers characterized by differing cognitive processes in the integration of spatial, 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 different 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 in 24 grade three classes, from eight schools. These schools were located in the compact North Delta area of the Delta School District, B.C. The community in which the schools are set 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 intelligence (Lorge-Thorndike Non-verbal battery; Lorge, Thorndike & Hagen, 1967), as the bases for group selection. Children with known learning, neuro- logical or emotional disab i l i t i e s or with uncorrected hearing or vision 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 intelligence, and which would give the largest groupings of above average and below average readers with regard to the grade three population tested. Seven of the boys selected were excluded due to failure to obtain parental permission to take part in 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 intelligence and representing above average and below average readers for this sub-population (see Table 2). Table 2 Characteristics of Reading Groups Below Average Readers Above Average Readers Boys Girls Boys Girls X SD X SD X SD X SD Age (mos) 105.97 5. 74 104. 78 5 .49 104. 23 3.30 104. 71 3.86 Non-verbal I.Q. . 94.22 9. 77 94. 08 9 .63 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 Grade Level 3.18 • 54 3. 17 .67 5. 92 .57 5. 72 .56 The standardized reading test appeared to give inflated scores such that the mean reading grade level was 4.82. Thus some 33 percent of boys and 25 percent of g i r l s classified as below average readers scored above their actual grade placement level. The mean grade level scores of the-below average (boys 3.18, gir 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 Instruments and Scoring Procedures Test instruments used, f a l l i n t o two categories - those used i n s e l e c t i o n of subjects and which gave the i n t e l l i g e n c e and reading measures, and those used w i t h the four groups thus s e l e c t e d , namely the modality matching t e s t s of 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 Tests, L e v e l C, Form 2. This t e s t has been the most commonly used reading measure i n past modality matching s t u d i e s . In a d d i t i o n i t was about to become part of the r e g u l a r t e s t i n g program of the Delta School D i s t r i c t . While the t e s t has some l i m i t a t i o n s (Buros, 1972; F a r r & Anastasiow, 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 R e l i a b i l i t y Data R e l i a b i l i t y study Reading measure A l t e r n a t e form r e l i a b i l i t y S p l i t h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y 1964-65 Vocabulary .85 .89 Comprehension .87 .91 1971-72 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 study i n 1968 which found concurrent v a l i d i t y w i t h four other standardized reading t e s t s to give median c o e f f i c i e n t s of .84 f o r vocabulary and .79 f o r comprehension. Form 2 of L e v e l C was s e l e c t e d i n view of the p o s s i b i l i t y that Form 1 had already been administered a t the beginning of the school year. 43 Canadian Lorge-Thorndike I n t e l l i g e n c e Test (non-verbal b a t t e r y ) . Although the Lorge-Thorndike I n t e l l i g e n c e Test 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 , only one of the published s t u d i e s used the Canadian v e r s i o n . In a survey of i n t e l l e c t i v e t e s t s used i n elementary schools i n A l b e r t a , Ogston (1973) conducted a review of associated research l i t e r a t u r e 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 estimates. The Canadian Lorge-Thorndike was the most f r e q u e n t l y used t e s t at the grade three l e v e l . Ogston w r i t e s that "... the Lorge-Thorndike has been subjected to the 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 only a s t a b i l i t y estimate not reported" (p. 274). R e l i a b i l i t y estimates were .76 to .90 f o r equivalent forms, .88 to .94 (Spearman-Brown) and .87 to .91 (Kuder-Richardson). The T e c h n i c a l Supplement (Lorge, Thorndike & Hagen, 1972) r e p o r t s odd-even r e l i a b i l i t y f o r the non-verbal b a t t e r y of L e v e l A as .93, a K-R 20 r e l i a b i l i t y of .93 and a standard e r r o r of measurement ranging from 3.6 to 4.8 d e v i a t i o n I.Q. p o i n t s . In a study conducted by the Greater V i c t o r i a 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 year, four months was .64 at the grade three l e v e l . V a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s are reported w i t h Canadian Test of B a s i c S k i l l s at grade 6 f o r vocabulary (.56), reading (.62) and composite (.71). Data on an Edmonton study at grade three gave c o r r e l a t i o n s of .50 w i t h 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 (Otis) and .69. The c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h Stanford-Binet at grade s i x was .78 and w i t h WISC F u l l Scale, .53. The T e c h n i c a l Supplement s t a t e s that the non-verbal b a t t e r y permits assessment of "... a b s t r a c t i n t e l l i g e n c e which 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 reading" (p. 4). 44 Modality Matching Tests The instruments for the modality matching tasks comprised three elements. Visual spatial (VS) stimuli were presented as dot patterns on 35 mm slide transparencies, the projector being controlled by inaudible impulses on one track of the instruction cassette tape. Auditory temporal (AT) stimuli were presented on the verbal instruction track of the tapes. These auditory stimuli were also used to cue and control the presentation of the visual temporal stimuli (VT) which were flashing light patterns. For each of these three elements there were two sets of stimulus patterns, one for presentation in the i n i t i a l or standard position and one for presentation in the f i n a l or comparison position. The three elements were combined in 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 in varying sized groups with short and long gaps. If a dot is represented as one unit in diameter, a short gap was .80 units and a long gap was 7.17 units. A series of visual patterns consisted of 38 slide transparencies: three examples, five practice items and 30 test items. Two series of slides were required (one standard and one comparison) with two copies of each series, (one for VS as standard, one for VS as comparison and two for VS-VS as both standard and comparison condition). A l l slides were tinted pale blue to avoid screen glare. 45 Standard and comparison pairs of stimuli had equal numbers of dots, varying in arrangement, sometimes being the same and sometimes different. The order of same or different items was randomized to avoid memory or systematic response set effects. Pairs of items were grouped in blocks of eight patterns having the same number of dots. Dots increased in number from four to seven over four blocks (see Appendix A for diagram). As the items increased in complexity, 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 slide presentation times ranging from two to four seconds on the original tapes, i t appeared that a ceiling effect was l i k e l y for the VS-VS condition. Times were accordingly reduced to range from one to three seconds. Since i t was not possible to re-cue the tapes to the reduced times, the original pulses were used to present the VS stimuli and a card, timed by stopwatch, was used to cut off the projection image at the appropriate time. The accuracy of this procedure was found to be comparable to the original cued timing. Auditory temporal stimuli. 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 originally made by Jarman (1977a) were modified for this study (see Appendix C). A l l beeps were .15 sec. in duration. Short pauses were .35 sec. and long pauses were 1.35 sec. Overall length of the patterns of beeps ranged from 1.15 seconds to 8.15 seconds over the three examples, five t r i a l s and 30 test items. Visual temporal stimuli. Tone bursts or beeps from the auditory temporal patterns became the triggering and controlling mechanism for 46 the v i s u a l temporal patterns of flashes of l i g h t (Jarman, Marshall & Moore, Note 2; see Appendix C). The exact timing and spacing of the auditory beeps was thus reproduced i n the f l a s h i n g of a small incandescent lamp. "Ready" s p a t i a l standard "and" s p a t i a l comparison 1.0 to 3.0 sec. 1.0 to 3.0 sec. or or 1.5 to 8.15 sec. 1.15 to 8.15 sec. temporal standard temporal comparison Figure 2. Arrangement of s p a t i a l and temporal elements i n matching tasks. V i s u a l , s p a t i a l , auditory and temporal combinations. Four o r i g i n a l cassette tapes were converted 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 tapes, where 1000 Hz sync-pulse cues were added to control the presentation times of the v i s u a l s p a t i a l ( s l i d e s ) s t i m u l i (see Appendix B). Reel-to- r e e l tapes were then copied onto cassettes. Five new copies of tapes were made and modified so that the tone bursts or beeps could control the l i g h t flashes and not be audible. Thus a l l nine combinations were accounted f o r and c o n t r o l l e d by the nine cassette tapes played on a Wollensak 3M tape recorder, modified to pick up the 500 Hz tone bursts which c o n t r o l l e d the l i g h t flashes (see Appendix C). Due to the ad 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 introductory i n s t r u c t i o n s were discarded i n favour of manually presented example and t r i a l items, working from standard s c r i p t s . A 1000 Hz solid-tone tape with breaker switch permitted presentation of auditory beeps. S i m i l a r l y a manual switch c i r c u i t permitted the l i g h t to be flashed manually. When the introductory section was completed the tape-controlled sequences f o r the 30 matching items presented the various integration combinations. Slides were projected from a standard distance 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 in the manual for the construction of standard scores appeared somewhat irregular. Grade scores were calculated according to the test norms. Lorge-Thorndike scores were converted into deviation IQ equivalents using test norms also. Each of the matching tasks were scored for the number of errors on the thirty items with no correction for guessing. The response required from the subject after 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 for the matching tasks but no indication as to correctness of choice was given thereafter. Materials Two sets of scripts were drawn up for standardization of introductory instructions. Nine in the f i r s t set were used for the i n i t i a l presentation in each of the nine orders of presentation. The second set of nine scripts was used on subsequent matching sessions, being somewhat simplified to avoid redundancy as subjects became familiar with procedures. Nine response forms were constructed, one for each of the integration tasks, with the words same different printed for each of the 35 items. The subject was thus required only to circ l e the word for the chosen response. Apart from the tape recorder and sync-cued projector the only additional 48 pieces of apparatus were the electronic circuits and cued tapes constructed at the U.B.C. Instructional Media Centre. Manual switching systems for the instructional 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. Principals in the North Delta group of schools were notified by the Board office that approval of a research study had been granted. In early February, 1978, the Principals were contacted by phone to arrange interviews to explain the purpose and nature of the study. In those interviews, Principals 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 in order to make the administration of the reading tests by classroom teachers as standard as possible. During this v i s i t a schedule was made for administration of the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test by the investigator. Three schools chose not to take part in the study. Testing was begun in the third week of February and completed by the f i r s t week of April. Scoring of a l l the reading and intelligence tests was carried out and double checked by the investigator. Students' reading vocabulary and comprehension scores were used to establish the overall 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 in each category were selected and matched for IQ and age, and 49 checked by the teachers according to the l i m i t a t i o n s set concerning freedom from d i s a b i l i t i e s . A l e t t e r was sent home to the parents 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 the purpose of the study 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 returned to the s c h o o l , g i v i n g or w i t h h o l d i n g permission f o r t h e i r c h i l d to take p a r t i n the study. Several schools i n v i t e d parents to evening meetings to ask questions about the study before responding to the request l e t t e r . F o l l o w i n g the parents' response and the IQ matching procedure, 36 boys and 36 g i r l s from each reading a b i l i t y l e v e l became the subjects of the study. Each c h i l d i n each group was then randomly assigned a number from one to nine which determined the order i n which they would do each of the matching t a s k s . Equal numbers from each group were assigned to each order of p r e s e n t a t i o n . The nine orders of p r e s e n t a t i o n were s e l e c t e d on the b a s i s of the t a b l e s of complete sets of orthogonal L a t i n Squares ( F i s h e r & Yates, 1963) which gave an approximately counterbalanced order (see Figure 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 Figure 3. Orders of p r e s e n t a t i o n of the matching tasks f o r each of the groups numbered one to nine. 50 A schedule was then drawn up in order to carry out the testing in 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 settle the children and establish working rapport. Testing was carried out in a variety of relatively 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 five testing sessions, two matching tasks were administered consecutively, requiring 45 minutes, with a small break between tasks in 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 in early June. The timetable of testing was arranged so that each child was tested at a different time of the day on each of the five testing occasions. 51 CHAPTER V RESULTS When the interaction i s significant, F ratios are not very helpful in answering the questions that are raised. What should be done? Let us follow Cox's (1958, p. 133) advice: "In the majority of cases ...intelligent ...plotting of the results is the most important step ..." A. Lubin (p.811) Subject Classifications From the summary data in Table 2 i t can be seen that the four groups of subjects were virtually undifferentiable on the basis of age and non-verbal I.Q. Similarly, the groups of boys and gi r l s for the total sample showed no significant sex differences in mean vocabulary and comprehension scores. In comparing mean scores for the reading a b i l i t y sub-groups, the only significant sex difference was for 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 limitations set on reading in subject selection had the effect of removing some of the extremes of reading and intellectual 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 for the grade three sub-population (mean = 100.25, S.D. = 15.48). The relation- ships among the reading measures, and between reading measures and I.Q. can be seen in Table 4. While vocabulary and comprehension were significantly correlated for both sexes and for a l l reading groups except low boys, the 52 c o r r e l a t i o n s of I.Q. and reading measures i n d i c a t e d some sex and reading a b i l i t y d i f f e r e n c e s . Table 4 C o r r e l a t i o n s of Reading and I.Q. Measures Boys G i r l s Boys and G i r l s Grade 3 Sub-population Vocabulary/Comprehension .34 AAA .18 .45 N=234 Vocabulary/T .Q. Comprehension/I.Q. Reading Groups 3 High Readers Vocabulary/Comprehension .35 Vocabulary/I.Q. .31 Comprehension/I.Q. .40 Low Readers Vocabulary/Comprehension .23 Vocabulary/I.Q. .10 Comprehension/I.Q. .19 AA AAA .23 AA .44 .13 N=252 AAA .40 i .63 i .56 i .66 .10 .13 AAA AAA AAA ,22 AA ,22 AA AA .23 N=486 N = 36 A AA p <.05 p <.01 AAA £<.001 While I.Q. and reading measures were g e n e r a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d f o r the grade three sub-population and f o r the high g i r l s , none of the 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 of low readers. The only other 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 high boys between I.Q. and comprehension. C o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the reading groups were a f f e c t e d by r e s t r i c t i o n of range as compared w i t h c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the sub-population. The r e s t r i c t i o n was e x p l i c i t f o r the reading measures si n c e average readers and some from the extremes were excluded. There was thus an i m p l i c i t r e s t r i c t i o n of range i n the I.Q. data, augmented by e x c l u s i o n of extremes of i n t e l l i g e n c e i n the matching f o r I.Q. process. Accordingly there was an i m p l i c i t l i m i t a - t i o n on the range of the matching task data w i t h e f f e c t s which i n f l u e n c e d the analyses based on the matching task data. Matching Tasks and C l a s s i f i c a t i o n V a r i a b l e s The r e l a t i o n s h i p of the e r r o r scores f o r modality matching tasks w i t h reading vocabulary and comprehension scores of the f o u r reading groups can be seen i n Tables 5 and 6. Table 5 C o r r e l a t i o n s of Modality Matching and Reading Measures: Boys Tasks Vocabulary Comprehension 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. Negative c o r r e l a t i o n s are due to use of e r r o r scores. *p <.05 **P <.01 54 The VT-VS task was significantly correlated with vocabulary for high reading boys and with comprehension for low:, readers. The converse task, VS-VT, showed the same pattern. It is of interest that the spatial- temporal integration tasks within vision were significantly related to different aspects of reading for the two levels of reading a b i l i t y . The VS-VS task was significantly related to comprehension for low boys. 'Thus none of the tasks was significantly correlated with word recognition for low reading boys, and none with comprehension for high readers. Table 6 Correlations of Modality Matching and Reading Measures: Girls Tasks Vocabulary Comprehension 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 correlation for g i r l readers showed some similarities and some differences when compared to the boys. For low g i r l s , two tasks with 55 AT standards (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- hension. There was a tendency f o r both vocabulary and comprehension to be more h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h VS-VS scores though only f o r low g i r l s ' vocabulary was t h i s s i g n i f i c a n t , together w i t h t o t a l reading scores f o r both groups of 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 vocabulary f o r high g i r l s , as i t was f o r high boys. Again there 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 tasks w i t h comprehension f o r high readers. Only the one task (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 reading 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 vocabulary f o r high readers. I t would appear that cross-modal and intramodal i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s are d i f f e r e n t i a l l y r e l a t e d to reading s k i l l s f o r the d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of reading a b i l i t y , together w i t h some sex d i f f e r e n c e s . Although no hypotheses were formulated about the r e l a t i o n s h i p of 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 , the nature of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p has been of importance i n reviewed l i t e r a t u r e . Since a l l groups were matched f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e , the only source of data on the r e l a t i o n s h i p of 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 the reading groups (see Table 7). The only c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the low reading groups w i t h any noteworthy s i g n i f i c a n c e were f o r the low boys on the VT-AT and VS-VT t a s k s . For the high readers, s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s occurred f o r high g i r l s on AT-AT, VT-AT and VT-VS tasks, the l a t t e r being the only task 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 high boys. S i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r h i g h reading g i r l s occurred on three tasks w i t h temporal standards, two of which i n v o l v e d AT comparisons. The only task which was c o r r e l a t e d w i t h I.Q. f o r both boy and g i r l high readers i n v o l v e d a temporal to s p a t i a l s h i f t 56 w i t h i n the v i s u a l modality (VT-VS). For low boys the task most h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h I.Q. inv o l v e d a s p a t i a l to temporal s h i f t w i t h i n the v i s u a l modality (VS-VT). The most d i r e c t observations were that i n t e l l i g e n c e and matching 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 Matching Tasks and Non -Verbal I.Q. Tasks Low Readers' I.Q. High Readers' I.Q. Boys G i r l s A l l Boys G i r l s A l l AT-AT -.25 -.02 -.13 -.16 A -.34 A -.24 AT-VT -.28 -.12 -.20 -.04 -.26 -.13 AT-VS -.26 -.25 A -.25 -.19 -.10 -.15 VT-AT * -.34 -.08 -.23 -.07 A -.34 -.15 VT-VT -.29 -.08 -.18 -.04 -.29 -.13 VT-VS -.21 -.06 -.14 A -.34 AA -.41 A* -.37 VS-AT -.16 -.22 -.19 -.15 -.22 -.18 VS-VT AA -.41 -.15 A -.28 -.23 -.25 A -.24 VS-VS -.28 -.14 -.22 -.09 -.31 -.11 Note. Negative c o r r e l a t i o n s are due to use of e r r o r scores. A P<.05 AA P <.01 Matching Task R e l i a b i l i t y From the l i t e r a t u r e review, r e l i a b i l i t y of the tasks used f o r modality matching was noted as f r e q u e n t l y questionable due to the small number of items used, and to 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 nine tasks, each c o n t a i n i n g 30 57 items f o r the two reading l e v e l s . These are reported i n Table 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 T a s k s 3 Task Low Readers 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 aKuder-•Richardson formula 20 The range and l e v e l of 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 reading l e v e l s , being p a r t i c u l a r l y even f o r high readers. The three lowest r e l i a b i l i t i e s f o r low readers were on the purely temporal tasks w i t h the highest e r r o r r a t e s . With a two choice response format and 100 items the estimated r e l i a b i l i t y should be about .74 (Ebel, 1969). Thus to have obtained r e l i a b i l i t i e s averaging .675 and .690 f o r low and high readers r e s p e c t i v e l y , f o r 30 item tasks, appearsto be a reasonable r e s u l t . Ebel (1969) estimated that to expect a r e l i a b i l i t y of .90 on a two-choices-per-item t e s t would r e q u i r e 270 items. Since the pooled item r e l i a b i l i t y f o r the nine t e s t s of 30 items (270 items i n t o t a l ) f o r both groups was .875, the r e l i a b i l i t y of the nine matching tasks was considered to be acceptable. Ebel a l s o pointed out that estimates of r e l i a b i l i t y 58 a r e r a i s e d above t h e expe c t e d l e v e l i f t e s t items a r e h i g h i n q u a l i t y and i f the t e s t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y homogeneous i n c o n t e n t . S i n c e the o b t a i n e d r e l i a b i l i t i e s f o r 30 items were c l o s e to t h o s e expected f o r a 100 i t e m t e s t , and s i n c e the c o n t e n t of t a s k s was homogeneous i t was assumed t h a t the q u a l i t y o f the items was o f an a c c e p t a b l e s t a n d a r d . T a b l e 9 Mean E r r o r s on Matching Tasks Low Readers High Readers Boys G i r l s Boys G i r l s T a s ks X S.D. X S. D. X S.D. X S.D. AT-AT 9.14 3.45 10.58 4. 02 7.83 3.93 7.64 3,65 AT-VT 10.25 4.61 11.00 4. 35 7.55 4.35 9.17 4.09 AT-VS 9.97 5.08 9.92 4. 16 6.72 3.79 7.25 3.64 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 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 Task Performance Q u e s t i o n one was a d d r e s s e d to the n a t u r e of 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 m o d a l i t y matching. Mean e r r o r s c o r e s on the n i n e matching t a s k s f o r the f o u r r e a d i n g groups can be seen i n T a b l e 9. E r r o r s c o r e s were a n a l y z e d by a f o u r way a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e , w i t h sex and r e a d i n g as between-subject v a r i a b l e s , and w i t h s t a n d a r d and comparison s t i m u l i as w i t h i n - s u b j e c t v a r i a b l e s . A s t r o n g main e f f e c t was found 59 f o r reading, w i t h the high readers s u p e r i o r on the matching tasks, F_ (1,140) = 28.49, p_<.001. The greatest d i f f e r e n c e i n mean e r r o r scores f o r the two reading l e v e l s occurred where (a) I n t e g r a t i o n of both a u d i t o r y w i t h v i s u a l and temporal with 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 temporal s t i m u l i (VT-AT) i . e . cross-modal w i t h i n the temporal dimension, and (c) the i n t e - g r a t i o n was intramodal to v i s i o n , and temporal (VT-VT) (see F i g u r e 4 ) . Although high readers were s u p e r i o r to low readers on the VS-VS task, the d i f f e r e n c e was not s i g n i f i c a n t (t = 1.49, p_<. 13). Hypothesis 1. I t was hypothesized that above average readers 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 average readers i n sensory i n t e g r a t i o n as measured by performance on modality matching tasks. As a r e s u l t of the s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t i n v o l v i n g reading l e v e l and modality matching, Hypothesis 1 was considered to be supported. A d d i t i o n a l support was gained from the patterns of 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 tasks w i t h reading s u b s k i l l s . S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were evident i n the a u d i t o r y , v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and temporal i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s of t h i r d grade boys and g i r l s who were above average readers, when compared w i t h below average readers. Task D i f f i c u l t y i n Cross-modal and Intramodal Matching Question 2 was 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 matching tasks i n terms of the v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , s p a t i a l and temporal elements and t h e i r combinations. 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 simplest estimate 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 scores on the matching tasks (see Table 9 and Figure 4). The 60 12 r 11 10 9 8 O c o <D 3 \ / 3h Low readers High readers 1 _L 1 AT-AT AT-VT AT-VS VT-AT VT-VT VT-VS VS-AT VS-VT VS-VS Matching Tasks Figure 4. Sources of main effect for reading. 61 four most d i f f i c u l t tasks f o r both reading l e v e l s were the pur e l y temporal t a s k s , AT-VT, VT-AT, VT-VT and AT-AT. With an AT standard, a VT comparison gave r e l a t i v e l y high e r r o r r a t e s f o r both groups of readers. E r r o r r a t e s increased when both standard and comparison elements were VT, e s p e c i a l l y f o r low readers. These e r r o r rates however, were surpassed by the e r r o r rates f o r AT comparisons w i t h VT i n i t i a l s t i m u l i . This was e s p e c i a l l y so f o r low readers. Next i n d i f f i c u l t y f o r both reading l e v e l s , and almost comparable i n er r o r r a t e s w i t h the f i r s t f our mentioned, were tasks w i t h a temporal standard and a VS comparison, namely AT-VS and VT-VS. While these VS comparisons gave r e l a t i v e l y high and approximately equal e r r o r r a t e s w i t h i n reading l e v e l s , VS standards reduced the e r r o r r a t e f o r a l l comparisons f o r both reading l e v e l s . Of the tasks w i t h a VS standard, VS-AT was most d i f f i c u l t f o r low readers while VS-VT was s l i g h t l y more d i f f i c u l t f o r high readers. Appearance of the VS element i n any p o s i t i o n i n matching tasks c o n t r i b u t e d to lower e r r o r r a t e s . The second set of r e l a t i o n s h i p s was seen f o r the a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e , i n the nature of the main e f f e c t s f o r the standard and comparison stimulus 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 the standard s t i m u l u s , F_ (2,280) = 422.68, p_ <£. 001 and a l e s s strong but s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r the comparison element, F (2,280) = 45.89, p_ <. 001. Figure 5 shows the nature and source of the main e f f e c t s f o r the standard and comparison elements. The very high s i g n i f i c a n c e of the standard main e f f e c t was due to the presence of VS s t i m u l i making the tasks much e a s i e r , combined w i t h the grea t e r d i f f i - c u l t y of matches where the standard stimulus was v i s u a l and temporal. 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 the comparison main e f f e c t , but to a 62 AT VT VS Standard or Comparison Stimuli Figure 5. Sources of main effects for standard and comparison stimuli. 63 A T V T V S S t a n d a r d S t i m u l i Figure 6. Sources of standard X comparison interaction. 64 lesser extent. The standard X comparison interaction was significant, F_ (4,560) = 4.10, p_ <. 003 (see Figure 6). The interaction was due to two influences. The lesser of these was a slight increase of error rate for VT comparisons with a VT standard as compared to an AT standard. The main influence was due to a greater increase in error rate for 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 indication i s that i t is 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 variation in the relationship trends. There were no significant double interactions of standard or comparison with reading, though the latter approached significance, J_ (2,280) = 2.37, p_ <• 06. This was due to the greater relative decrease in error rate for low readers for VT and VS comparisons. The lack of significant interaction between the standard stimulus and reading indicated that the characteristics of the i n i t i a l stimulus in matching contributed to a consistently higher performance by high readers. The tr i p l e interaction of standard X comparison X reading was s i g n i f i - cant, F_ (4,560) = 3.45, p_ <. 01 (see Figure 7). The sources of this interaction showed some of the same influences that were evident in the stimulus X comparison interaction but modified by the high reader and low reader differences. The disordinal interaction of AT and VT elements was again evident with the increase in d i f f i c u l t y of the VT-AT task over the AT-AT task being more marked for low readers than high readers. A second source was due to the increase in d i f f i c u l t y of the tasks with VT compari- sons as the standard changed from AT to VT for low readers. Task 65 ..4 _ » » * A_ \ \\ \ \ -Q \ \ h- o \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \° \ \\ \ \ V • A T \ \ \\ - L o w r e a d e r s \ \ \ H i g h r e a d e r s \ \ \ \ b A T V T V S S t a n d a r d S t i m u l i Figure 7. Sources of the standard X comparison X reading i n t e r a c t i o n . 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 triple interaction though i t did not to the double interaction. Relative to the d i f f i c u l t y of the AT-VS task for both groups, the error rate for VS comparisons with VT standards was lower for low readers but higher for high readers. Similarly for VS comparisons with VS standards, the relative decrease in error rate for low readers was greater than for high readers. The increase in d i f f i c u l t y of temporal comparisons with VS standards compared to VS-VS task d i f f i c u l t y was greater for low readers than high readers. Two further trends contributed to the interaction. A slight disordinal tendency was noticeable for temporal comparisons with VT and VS standards for the high readers but not for low readers. 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 in 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 in error rate for low readers when both comparison and standard stimuli were visual and spatial. The opposite trends were seen for high readers. As has already been indicated there was no main effect for sex in the analysis of variance, nor was there a significant interaction of reading and sex. However, as Kirk (1968) points out, whenever a significant interaction occurs i t indicates the need for interpretation and qualification of the main effects in the light of differences among specific means at specific levels. Although the majority of interactions involving sex were not significant, a significant double interaction suggested that some 67 comments be made. Reference to Figure 8 shows that girls made more errors on purely temporal tasks than did boys, this being especially so for high reading g i r l s . Low reading g i r l s made slightly 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 significant, the comparison X sex interaction was significant, 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 for g i r l s than boys. There were almost no sex differences for AT and VS comparisons. Thus the presence of a VT comparison stimulus in matching tasks was a significant discriminator between male and female readers. Of the t r i p l e interactions involving sex none was significant. Similar trends were apparent in the data however, for in 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 in both the standard and comparison conditions. The f i n a l and quadruple interaction of standard X comparison X reading X sex was significant, F_ (4,560) = 2.48, p_ <. 04. While specific analysis of the sources, and interpretation of the meaning, of the interaction 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 specific effects within, the standard X comparison X reading interaction, a number of 68 12r 11 h 10 8 to c ° 6 0) o*' // Low readers OJ" d V High readers ^ o* v. \ Girls Boys \ \\ \ \ \ 6 1 _L _L _L AT-AT AT-VT AT-VS VT-AT VT-VT VT-VS VS-AT VS-VT VS-VS Matching Tasks Figure 8. Matching task error scores for reading groups. 69 pairwise comparisons were made of differences in 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. The oc = .01 level of significance was 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 literature review, reference was made to the modal specific view of sensory functioning which attributes specific locations and types of information processing to each modality. From the theory of modal specificity i t would be expected that the processing of temporal informa- tion in the visual modality would produce the highest error rate. This was investigated by comparing the difference in mean error rates for those tasks where temporal information was processed i n the visual modality in 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 pairs of tasks were tested by pairwise comparisons. The results of these comparisons can be seen in Table 10. Similarly, from the reviewed literature, some investigators held that cross-^modal integrations were hierarchically more d i f f i c u l t than intramodal integrations. This view was 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 similarly 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, only cross-modal tasks w i t h VS standards were compared w i t h the VS-VS intramodal tasks (VS-VS vs VS-AT and VS-VS vs VS-VT). Table 10 Di 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 Auditory D i f f e r e n c e D i f f e r e n c e AT-AT : VT-VT -1.6 -0.8 AT-VS : VT-VS 0.1 -0.3 VS-AT : VS-VT 0.6 -0.3 Cross--modal and Intramodal Comparisons AT-AT : AT-VT -0.8 -0.6 AT-AT : VT-AT * -2.0 -0.9 VT-VT : VT-AT -0.4 -0.1 VT-VT : AT-VT . 0.8 0.2 VS-VS : VS-AT A. -3.4 -0.8 VS-VS : VS-VT •A--2.1 -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 of 1.6 would be re q u i r e d f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e at « = .01 with 560 degrees of freedom and w i t h a MS e r r o r value of 8.15. Results showed that the only s i g n i f i - cant d i f f e r e n c e s were f o r low readers i n comparing AT-AT w i t h VT-VT, AT-AT w i t h VT-AT and f o r the two comparisons w i t h VS-VS ta s k s . While the f i r s t of 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 that processing temporal 71 information in the visual modality i s indeed more d i f f i c u l t than in the auditory modality, (thus supporting the modal-specific view), this held true only for low readers. The other VT against AT differences for low readers showed small and insignificant trends opposing the modal specific view, with lower error score differences favouring the VT element. For high readers a l l differences were small and insignificant 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 visual to auditory (cross-modal) integration within the temporal dimension (VT-AT) was significantly more d i f f i c u l t than AT-AT (intramodal) integration, but again only for low readers. A similar trend for high readers did not approach significance. The cross-modal match VT-AT was also slightly but not significantly more d i f f i c u l t that VT-VT (intramodal), for both groups of readers. The complementary temporal cross-modal integration AT-VT when compared to AT-AT and VT-VT (intramodal) integrations, showed cross- modal to be easier than intramodal in the visual modality and more d i f f i c u l t than intramodal in the auditory modality. Neither of the d i f f e r - ences was significant. Spatial to temporal integrations were more d i f f i c u l t than VS intramodal integrations, but only significantly so for low readers. Spatial to temporal shifts within the visual modality were less d i f f i c u l t than spatial to temporal shifts which also involved visual to auditory integration. Item Analyses The f i n a l method of examining the relative d i f f i c u l t y of matching tasks consisted of analyses of item characteristics within sub-tasks for the total 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 nine tasks. Since the matching tasks were good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between above average and below average readers i t was reasoned that items which 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 task, would a l s o be good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between high and low readers. Such items would be those w i t h the highest 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 the t o t a l sample. These items could then be f u r t h e r analyzed and c l a s s i f i e d 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 standard and comparison c o n d i t i o n s and i n terms of s t r u c t u r e of items and the types of i n t e g r a t i o n i n v o l v e d . Twenty-six items a t t a i n e d a point b i s e r i a l c o r r e l a t i o n of .40 and above f o r one or more of the nine tasks (see Table 11.) When p l o t t e d i n a frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n , point b i s e r i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s of .40 and above represented the upper 33 percent of the 270 c o r r e l a t i o n s . These items were anlayzed according to a number of c r i t e r i a ! Item complexity. Table 11 shows the s t r u c t u r e of the p a i r e d items. While 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 . dot, beep, or l i g h t f l a s h ) might be expected to be more o f t e n the d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items, i t was the requirements of the i n t e g r a t i o n task r a t h e r than simply the number of u n i t s i n the stimulus p a t t e r n s that enhanced or diminished the f i n a l d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power of an item w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r task. Items which were good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s i n one task were sometimes not good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s on other t a s k s . Thus h a l f of the f o u r - u n i t items were strong 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 the t a s k s , w h i l e s i x of the s i x and seven-unit items were good d i s c r i m i n a t o r s i n only one of the t a s k s . Item s t r u c t u r e . Of the 26 items chosen, 15 matches were ' d i f f e r e n t ' and 11 were 'same'. 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 point d i f f e r e n c e s o l e l y at the beginning of the standard and 73 Table 11 Po 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 D i s c r i m i n a t i n g Items Item S t i m u l i AT-AT AT-VT AT-VS VT-AT VT-VT VT-VS VS-AT VS-VT VS-VS .... a 6 b .41 8 .. .. .48 .54 .43 .45 .57 .51 9 ... . .43 .41 .43 .43 .43 .43 10 ... . .42 .47 .42 11 . . . . .50 .40 12 ... . .45 13 . . . . .43 .58 .43. .46 .40 .64 .45 .41 14 .40 .40 .51 15 .44 .54 .43 .47 16 .51 .46 .42 .40 .46 .40 17 .42 .52 .40 18 .43 .52 .42 19 .53 .43 .40 21 .49 .50 22 .43 .55 .42 74 Item Stimuli AT-AT AT-VT AT-VS VT-AT VT-VT VT-VS VS-AT VS-VT VS-VS 23 .43 24 .40 .40 .47 .42 .43 25 .48 .58 .47 .40 26 .42 .50 .43 .40 .43 27 .48 29 .45 30 .43 .44 .46 31 .43 .46 .44 33 .46 34 .43 35 .41 Standard stimulus ^Comparison stimulus comparison stimuli. In two items the difference was at both the beginning and middle of the items (e.g. item 21), for 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), in two items i t was at the end (e.g. item 16), and in seven items i t was at both middle and end (e.g. item 19). In a l l 75 11 of the 'same' items the subject had to wai t u n t i l the comparison p a t t e r n was completed before being able to make a match. Thus i n the b u l k of d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items the middle and end of the s t i m u l i were the key p o i n t s where c o r r e c t o r erroneous judgements could be made. Of the nine items which were d i s c r i m i n a t i n g i n the VS-VS task, where the s t r u c t u r a l u n i t s were viewed simultaneously, seven had the p o i n t of d i f f e r e n c e concentrated at the end or middle and end. F i f t e e n out of 17 items which contained clumps of three o r fo u r u n i t s appeared among the d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items. Items w i t h i n t a s k s . Three of the p u r e l y temporal tasks (which had the highest e r r o r r a t e s ) namely VT-VT, AT-AT and VT-AT, had the smallest 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 task, which required i n t e g r a t i o n s both from v i s u a l to a u d i t o r y and s p a t i a l to temporal, had the greatest number of d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items (16). The remainder of tasks had e i t h e r nine or ten items. The i m p l i c a t i o n i s that the e a s i e r and more d i f f i c u l t items are not the best 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 su b j e c t s succeeding o r f a i l i n g on these items. By comparing point b i s e r i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r each reading l e v e l w i t h those of the t o t a l sample f o r each task i t was p o s s i b l e to determine 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 both low and high readers. The general p a t t e r n was f o r the purely temporal presentations of items to be l e s s d i s c r i m i n a t i n g but equally so f o r high and low readers. A middle group 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 both reading 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 readers. Presentations of items w i t h a VS standard 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 both reading l e v e l s or d i s c r i m i n a t i n g only f o r low readers. 76 The f i n a l b l o ck of most complex (7 u n i t ) items when presented i n the VT standard 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 items, suggesting that the d i f f i c u l t y of these items made them no longer 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 temporal i n t e g r a t i o n s . D i s c r i m i n a t i n g items were a l s o c l a s s i f i e d i n terms of the 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 nature of the i n t e g r a t i o n s thus produced. Of the 80 item by task appearances, items w i t h temporal standards occurred 45 times and items w i t h temporal comparisons appeared 52 times. These items w i t h temporal standards comprised 25 items w i t h AT standards and 20 w i t h VT standards. Items w i t h temporal comparisons were evenly d i v i d e d between AT and VT. Items w i t h VS standards 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 standard p a t t e r n s and ease of VS standard s t i m u l i i s a p p l i e d to these f i n d i n g s the suggestion i s that the s m a l l e r number of items w i t h VT standards as d i s c r i m i n a t i n g items i s due to the greater d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l . The occurrence 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 standards and s l i g h t l y increased d i f f i c u l t y of matches w i t h VS 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 (auditory 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 required s p a t i a l to temporal i n t e g r a t i o n s . Temporal to s p a t i a l i n t e g r a t i o n s occurred 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 converse occurred i n 20 and 22 items r e s p e c t i v e l y . Thus i t would appear that f o r those items which best d i s c r i m i n a t e between good and poor readers, frequency of occurrence 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 infrequency of occurrence 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 similar discrimination power to those requiring only a spatial to temporal integration. Temporal to spatial integrations would be less 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 in d i f f i c u l t y and discrimina- tion power. Of the intramodal matches, integrations within AT and within VT dimensions are equally more d i f f i c u l t and less 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 level depending more upon the temporal-spatial dimensions than upon the modalities themselves. By virtue of the number of discriminating items in 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 visual integration task were to be used for that purpose.. Hypotheses 2.1 and 2.2. The hypotheses arising from Question two dealt with the qualitative differences between above average and below average readers in terms of d i f f i c u l t y levels in the processing of specific types of information intrinsic to the integration tasks. Quantitative and qualitative differences were found between the two reading levels on specific tasks, specific types of integration and with specific elements of integration tasks. Significant interactions occurred between elements of theAintegration tasks, their order of presentation and reading level. Consequently Hypotheses 2.1 and 2.2 were considered to be supported. 78 Cognitive Processes Question three was concerned with different 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 significant main effect for sex in the analysis of variance, the matching scores were collapsed across sex within reading levels. Pooled error scores for the matching tasks were intercorrelated separately for each reading level (see Table 12). Table 12 Intercorrelations of Matching Tasks for Low and High Readers Tasks AT-AT AT-VT AT-VS VT-AT VT-VT VT-VS VS-AT VS-VT VS-VS AT-AT .585 .499 .603 .640 .579 .442 .603 .340 AT-VT .474 .553 .551 .692 .450 .358 .265 .271 AT-VS .546 .580 .517 .519 .517 .438 .284 .217 VT-AT .472 .634 .512 .588 .485 .464 .350 .404 VT-VT .405 .317 .242 .387 .444 .468 .308 .365 VT-VS .585 .519 .544 .417 .429 .467 .457 .287 VS-AT .401 .386 .666 .288 .263 .610 .320 .466 VS-VT .611 .459 .563 .409 .533 .614 .504 .367 VS-VS .264 .489 .401 .314 .277 .483 .569 .510 Note. High readers are above the diagonal, low readers below. Inspection of the matrices showed some interesting differences between the two reading groups in the patterns of intercorrelations. For those intercorrelations where the standard stimulus was VS the coefficients were generally higher for low readers than high readers except for the VS-AT 79 tasks. When VS-AT was intercorrelated with the purely temporal tasks with VT standards for low readers, the coefficients were considerably lower than for high readers. When VS-AT was intercorrelated with any task with a VS comparison the coefficients for low readers were considerably higher than for high readers. On a l l these task intercorrelations for high readers, the coefficients were consistently even. When the VT-VT task was intercorrelated with the other purely temporal tasks plus AT-VS and VS-AT, the coefficients for the high readers were considerably higher than for low readers. The remaining intercorrelations were relatively similar for both groups of readers. The matrices were factor analyzed by principal components analysis with unities in the diagonal, followed by a varimax rotation of the factor loading matrix. The criterion adopted for retention of factors was the Kaiser-Guttman criterion of eigenvalues greater than unity. Although the principal 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 likelihood procedure) and principal components solutions, with both orthogonal (varimax) and oblique (Harris-Kaiser) rotations were carried out as a check on the original analyses. Since these alternative analyses produced very similar results, the original principal 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. Consequently this second factor was retained. Results for the low readers are given in Table 13. The f i r s t factor had its heaviest loadings from those tasks which include a VS element. The second factor had i t s main loadings from tasks 80 Table 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 ta t i o n : Low Readers Task Factor I 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 Component Variance 2.893 2.849 % Component Variance 50.38 49.62 w i t h temporal elements. The only two tasks w i t h an i n i t i a l temporal stimulus element which d i d not weight the second f a c t o r more h i g h l y were those where the comparison stimulus was VS (AT-VS and VT-VS). In both these cases the loadin g s on the f i r s t (VS) f a c t o r were higher, which suggest- ed that where v i s u a l s p a t i a l and temporal i n t e g r a t i o n s are i n v o l v e d f o r low readers the VS element plays a predominant p a r t , even i f i t i s not the i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s . Something o f t h i s i n f l u e n c e of VS s t i m u l i as comparisons was evident i n the patterns of i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s already mentioned. I t i s c l e a r that the alignment of f a c t o r s was on the s p a t i a l - t e m p o r a l dimension r a t h e r than the v i s u a l and auditory m o d a l i t i e s . I f i t had been 81 the modality of p r e s e n t a t i o n of the i n i t i a l stimulus which loaded the f a c t o r s the tasks w i t h VT standards would have loaded the same f a c t o r as the tasks w i t h VS standards, which was not the case. A f u r t h e r i r r e g u l a r i t y showed the VS-VT task to load s l i g h t l y more h e a v i l y on the temporal f a c t o r . A p o s s i b l e reason f o r t h i s was that VT as a comparison stimulus was c l e a r l y a powerful element i n the a n a l y s i s of variance. Both of the 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 to the common variance of the a n a l y s i s . Factors f o r the high readers are shown i n Table 14. Eigenvalues f o r high readers 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 . Table 14 P r i n c i p a l Components A n a l y s i s w i t h Varimax Rot a t i o n : High 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 Variance 3.387 2.273 % Component Variance 59.84 40.16 82 In c o n t r a s t to the low readers, Factor I f o r high readers has i t s loadings p r i m a r i l y from the temporal element, and p a r t i c u l a r l y the temporal element i n the i n i t i a l o r standard p o s i t i o n . The three tasks w i t h VS as the i n i t i a l s timulus have the highest loadings on Factor I I . This a l s o was the opposite f o r low readers. In f u r t h e r c o n t r a s t to the low readers, where VS and AT i n t e g r a t i o n s occur f o r high readers, i f VS i s i n the comparison p o s i t i o n i t does not load more h e a v i l y on the VS f a c t o r . I t i s of i n t e r e s t that the temporal f a c t o r f o r low readers appears to be loaded h e a v i l y by tasks w i t h the temporal element also i n the comparison p o s i t i o n , w h i l e f o r high readers the loadings are more from the temporal element i n the standard p o s i t i o n . The f a c t o r s i n the a n a l y s i s f o r high readers c o n t r i b u t e d d i f f e r e n t l y to the common variance than the f a c t o r s f o r low readers, w i t h the temporal f a c t o r (Factor I) c o n t r i b u t i n g approximately 20% more variance than Factor I I . Comparison of the analyses f o r the two reading l e v e l s i n d i c a t e d d i f f e r - ences i n the processing of temporal and s p a t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n and i n the part played by the i n i t i a l stimulus i n i n t e g r a t i o n t a s k s . For competent readers the nature of the i n i t i a l s timulus i n terms of i t s temporal or s p a t i a l q u a l i t i e s , d i c t a t e d which f a c t o r was loaded by the task. For these readers there appeared to 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 the temporal dimension. Whether the i n i t i a l temporal stimulus was v i s u a l (VT) or a u d i t o r y (AT), or was followed by a cross-modal or i n t r a - modal match, a l l tasks had s i m i l a r high loadings on the temporal f a c t o r . Less able readers, on the other hand appeared to be more i n f l u e n c e d i n the processing of temporal information by the presence of the v i s u a l s p a t i a l element. When temporal standard s t i m u l i (AT and VT) were matched 83 with a VS comparison, the l o a d i n g was highest on the VS f a c t o r . S i m i l a r l y , i n those tasks r e q u i r i n g i n t e g r a t i o n of temporal and s p a t i a l elements w i t h i n the v i s u a l modality (VT-VS and VS-VT), the f a c t o r loadings were almost equal w i t h the s l i g h t l y higher l o a d i n g on the element o c c u r r i n g as the comparison stimulus rather than the i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s . Thus f o r low readers the v i s u a l modality appeared to play 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 being somewhat m o d a l - s p e c i f i c , w i t h a greater f a c i l i t y f o r the processing of s p a t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n . The above average readers i n c o n t r a s t seemed to process 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 both 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 both of the analyses the intramodal and cross-modal tasks AT-AT, VT-VT, AT-VT and VT-AT loaded s i m i l a r l y and highest on the temporal f a c t o r . This appeared to i n d i c a t e that s i m i l a r c o g n i t i v e processing occurs f o r both types of i n t e g r a t i o n , with cross-modal i n t e g r a t i o n not a higher order process than i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h i n modality. Hypothesis 3. Results of the e x p l o r a t o r y f a c t o r analyses i n d i c a t e d d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r s t r u c t u r e of the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n matrices f o r above average and below average readers. Loadings on the f a c t o r s i n terms of the i n f l u e n c e of the v i s u a l s p a t i a l element was a l s o d i f f e r e n t f o r the two groups. As a consequence, Hypothesis 3 was considered to be supported. The c o g n i t i v e processing of s p a t i a l , temporal, v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y informa- t i o n i s d i f f e r e n t f o r above average and below average readers. 84 CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION The g r e a t e s t u s e f u l n e s s o f r e s e a r c h may not be i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f s p e c i f i c r e m e d i a l t e c h n i q u e s , but i n the c o n t r i b u t i o n which i t makes to the c a t a l o g i n g and p r o p e r d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e v a r i e t y o f human a b i l i t i e s . J . T o r g e s e n (p.433) The purpose of t h i s s t u d y was to i n v e s t i g a t e the s e n s o r y i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s o f above average and below average r e a d e r s a t t h e t h i r d grade l e v e l , as measured by 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 aim was to u n d e r s t a n d more about the p r o c e s s o f l e a r n i n g t o r e a d t h r o u g h l e a r n i n g more about t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f good and poor r e a d e r s i n the i n t e g r a t i o n 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 f o r m a t i o n . An i n t e g r a l aim was to r e c t i f y some of the weaknesses e v i d e n t 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 p a r t i c u l a r emphasis i n the l a t t e r r e g a r d was the need to a v o i d the c o n f o u n d i n g o f temporal and s p a t i a l elements o f v i s u a l s t i m u l i i n matching t a s k s by i n c l u d i n g a l l n i n e c o m b i n a t i o n s of a u d i t o r y , v i s u a l , s p a t i a l and temporal elements of i n t e g r a t i o n , p r e s e n t e d i n as p r e c i s e , c o n s i s t e n t and o b j e c t i v e a manner as p o s s i b l e . Other such emphases were to i n c r e a s e r e l i a b i l i t y and p r e v e n t c e i l i n g e f f e c t s f o r the m a t c h i n g t a s k s , t o c o n t r o l f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e d i f f e r e n c e s i n the groups b e i n g compared, and to r e l a t e the m o d a l i t y matching t a s k s s p e c i f i c a l l y to r e a d i n g a t an age where d e c o d i n g 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 specific and detailed analysis of the relationship to reading a b i l i t y of the auditory, visual, spatial and temporal elements of integration in terms of their combinations in 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 level for over 500 grade three students at approximately one year above actual grade placement. It 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 intelligence, accounted for the inclusion of some below average readers who were reading above their grade placement level. This fact was somewhat mitigated by the widely held view in the lower mainland of British Columbia that the reading tests in question give inflated 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 levels were significantly different in matching a b i l i t y . Within the limitations of group intelligence tests, and with the further constraint that only the non-verbal battery was administered, the four groups were matched for intelligence. It is likely that good readers would have performed relatively better on a verbal intelligence test with the converse for poor readers. Similarly, the poorer readers may possibly have performed relatively better on the non-verbal test in relation to the good readers (Hage & Stroud, 1959). In addition, while the mean I.Q. and standard deviation for the grade three population were almost identical with the Canadian standardization figures, these data for 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 to the e x c l u s i o n of more of the above average readers and more h i g h l y i n t e l l i g e n t students by the matching process. While the c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the grade three p o p u l a t i o n were g e n e r a l l y i n keeping 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 reading (Chester, 1974), the r e l a t i o n s h i p c l e a r l y v a r i e d f o r the s e l e c t e d groups of readers and f o r sex groups. I t must be kept i n mind that 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 reading groups i n f l u e n c e d the c o r r e l a t i o n s of measures based on these groupings. Although matched f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e , poorer readers d i f f e r e d from good readers i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p of I.Q. to the reading s k i l l s of word r e c o g n i t i o n and compre- hension. C o r r e l a t i o n s f o r high readers 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 , e s p e c i a l l y f o r g i r l s . None of the c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the low readers approach- ed s i g n i f i c a n c e . This was i n s p i t e of the greater v a r i a b i l i t y of scores f o r low readers. Few of the reviewed research a r t i c l e s provided comparable inf o r m a t i o n . In the most comparable study Bryden (1972) found approximately equal c o r r e l a t i o n s of .35 and .37, f o r good and poor readers r e s p e c t i v e l y , 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 scores on the Gates M a c G i n i t i e Reading Tests. There was no breakdown i n t o reading s u b s k i l l s . Bryden's subjects had mean I.Q.s approximately 15 p o i n t s higher than the c h i l d r e n of t h i s study. For the c h i l d r e n of the present study i t would appear that 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 to 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 reading boys. The same held f o r low reading g i r l s . This would be i n keeping 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 f o r 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 of matching w i t h comprehension but not matching w i t h word r e c o g n i t i o n . I f word r e c o g n i t i o n i s more 87 h e a v i l y grounded i n perceptual d i s c r i m i n a t i o n than i s comprehension, t h i s i s not a s u r p r i s i n g f i n d i n g . One would expect f a c t o r s other than perceptual decoding and i n t e l l i g e n c e to i n f l u e n c e comprehension, among which are a number of f a c t o r s considered to c o n t r i b u t e to sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n reading. The low r e l a t i o n s h i p of I.Q. to reading f o r low readers suggests that some other i n t e r v e n i n g f a c t o r s cause i n t e r f e r e n c e . Among these must be sensory i n t e g r a t i o n , which brings both unique and common v a r i a n c e to the t r i p a r t i t e r e l a t i o n s h i p . In s p i t e of some c o n t r a d i c t o r y r e s u l t s i n st u d i e s 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 sensory 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 of f i n d i n g s supports a 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.Q. and modality matching, and between modality matching and reading over and above the i n f l u e n c e of 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 that 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 the e f f e c t of reducing the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the 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 the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the 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 high (Beery, 1967; Jones, 1970; Kahn & B i r c h , 1968; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick et 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 w i t h I.Q. and almost no c o r r e l a t i o n f o r high readers. Representing reading and matching by one composite score obviously leads to l o s s of d e s c r i p t i v e d e t a i l . I t must be remembered that Bryden 1s subjects were considerably higher i n mean I.Q. I t i s c l e a r that the r e l a t i o n s h i p of modality matching 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 reading a b i l i t y l e v e l s i s a very complex one, and i n f l u e n c e d by c o n t r i b u t i n g f a c t o r s i n an i n t e r a c t i v e f a s h i o n . This complex r e l a t i o n s h i p i s even more evident when the- separate tasks 88 are c o r r e l a t e d w i t h I.Q. None of the reviewed s t u d i e s reported these data. There were sex d i f f e r e n c e s as w e l l as reading l e v e l d i f f e r e n c e s i n the patterns of c o r r e l a t i o n s i n the present study. None of the tasks 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 I.Q. f o r low reading g i r l s and only one f o r high boys. On seven of the nine tasks low reading boys and high g i r l s had the highest c o r r e l a t i o n s , a number of which were s i g n i f i c a n t and near s i g n i f i c a n t , suggesting that the a b i l i t i e s of these groups were more s i m i l a r . In a d d i t i o n , observation of the reading group p r o f i l e s on the matching tasks shows that the high g i r l s ' p r o f i l e i s more s i m i l a r to the low boys than the high boys. In view of these f a c t s and the high boys' s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher comprehension scores, i t may be that able g i r l readers and low readers are more t i e d to perceptual aspects of the reading process, and to 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 temporal aspects, as evidenced by the high e r r o r r a t e s on tasks with VT elements. I t i s of i n t e r e s t that-those matching tasks 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 both I.Q. and reading f o r high readers i n c l u d e the AT-AT task and the two tasks 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 tasks are three of the f o u r on which 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 readers. For low readers the only task 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. and both reading measures was AT-VS, a double i n t e g r a t i o n task which seems to have importance i n d i s c r i m i n a t i n g between good and poor readers. These c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s support .the n o t i o n that poorer readers f i n d temporal processing 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 modality and are most at ease with v i s u a l s p a t i a l s t i m u l i . The present f i n d i n g s suggest that a f u r t h e r area of study could 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 using sub-components of i n t e l l i g e n c e and more v a r i e d reading measures, w h i l e r e t a i n i n g the nine 89 i n t e g r a t i o n tasks. Using sub-tests of the Wechsler I n t e l l i g e n c e Scale 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 of sub-tests would be a p o s s i b i l i t y . In p a r t i c u l a r the apparent s i m i l a r i t y between the p r o f i l e s of low reading boys and high 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 high 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 to matching and reading 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 Modality Matching From the foregoing d i s c u s s i o n there have been i n d i c a t i o n s of sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n some aspects of modality matching and reading l e v e l . I t i s not a simple matter to e x p l a i n the absence of sex d i f f e r e n c e i n reading f o r the grade three population, though a s i m i l a r trend was found by R e i l l y (1971). Of the major explanations u s u a l l y given f o r sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n reading (Dwyer, 1973), namely d i f f e r e n t i a l maturation, reader content, negative treatment of boys by female teachers or c u l t u r a l expectations 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 that a high q u a l i t y of reading i n s t r u c t i o n i n a compact community deals w i t h the l a t t e r three explanations, 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 are most important, as Dwyer (1973) and Johnson (1973) suggest. Bentzen (1963) suggested that sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n reading 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 expectations and the m a t u r a t i o n a l development of the reader. I f i n f a c t these s t r e s s e s are minimized f o r the c h i l d r e n of t h i s study, and i f as Buktenica (1970) proposes, the optimal perceptual development has been achieved by 8 years of age, these f a c t o r s could indeed account f o r the absence of any s i g n i f i c a n t sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n 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 apply 90 in the matter of sex differences observed in the matching task performance. Although no main effect was found for reading nor any interaction of sex and reading level, significant specific differences did occur at certain points. Both Jorgensen and Hyde (1974) and Reilly (1971) suggested that sensory integration and reading achievement are related in a complex manner involving sex differences. From the performance on the matching tasks by the four groups i t is clear that g i r l s appear to handle VT stimuli less easily than boys when there is no VS element involved in the match, i.e. when the integrations are either intramodal or cross-modal within the temporal dimension. Expressed in another way, and taking into account the significant interaction of comparison stimulus and sex, g i r l s have more di f f i c u l t y in matching when the second portion of the match is visual and temporal. When the VS element is matched with VT stimuli sex differences drop practically 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 for a l l groups, and the patterns of scores involving the auditory element in cross-modal matches for both reading levels, suggest that this is not the case. The practical significance for reading competence of the g i r l s ' VT weakness is not readily apparent since boys and g i r l s within reading levels read equally well. Similarly, for low readers, the practical significance of a weakness in AT-AT integration for g i r l s is not obvious. These g i r l s may simply be less attentive to auditory stimuli of this nature. On the other hand i t may reflect once more the complex interaction of integration a b i l i t i e s , sex, intelligence and reading, as well as the nature of the task. 91 The other aspect of sex difference of note was for integrations involving VS elements, especially for low boys on VS-AT, which is a double integration task. A weakness on this task may be a peculiarity 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. Low boys here showed the opposite trend. 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 relative 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 specificity i t could equally be a developed incompetence in the over-use of the spatial adeptness of the visual modality. Modality Matching and Reading Earlier studies used a variety of methods, tasks, numbers and types of items, ages, and sex groupings. Although the majority of studies found a significant 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 visual spatial, visual 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 significant 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 significantly superior. In the present study the good readers were significantly 92 superior on a l l tasks except VS-VS, in a l l cases the probability being less than .001. Bryden (1972) suggested a non linear relationship between matching and reading, with the correlation dropping to zero once a moderate level of reading was achieved. It appears that Bryden's view is too simple. It did not take into account the elements of the integration tasks, particu- larly the spatial and temporal dimensions, nor did i t take into account more specific sex differences. The necessary minimal level for adequate reading performance may vary with different combinations of the contributory factors. The plotted patterns of matching scores for 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. In addition, Bryden's subjects were few and of above average intelligence. The items used were fewer and simpler than in the present study, which made for much smaller differences in task error scores. The VS-VS task showed evidence of a ceiling 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 is 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 shifts in cross-modal integrations (Derevensky, 1978). Thus, in the Bryden (1972) study, while performance on AT-AT, AT-VT, VT-VS, VS-AT, VS-VT and VS-VS are comparable in 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 stimuli show some differences. The d i f f i c u l t y level of these 93 tasks d i d not show a marked increase i n e r r o r s i n the Bryden study as compared to the present study. Bryden's data showed decreasing e r r o r rates f o r these tasks except f o r poor readers on the VT-AT task which had a s l i g h t l y higher e r r o r r a t e . S i m i l a r l y , the good readers' e r r o r r a t e on the AT-VS task does not drop i n the Bryden study, though i t d i d f o r Bryden's poor readers 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 study. The 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) provide f u r t h e r comparisons though they used younger, black and chicano c h i l d r e n , not a l l of whom did a l l tasks. Their s t u d i e s were not a p p l i e d to reading. They g e n e r a l l y supported the i n c r e a s i n g and high e r r o r r a t e f o r the two temporal tasks w i t h VT standards. They a l s o showed the step i n the p r o f i l e of task scores where a lower e r r o r r a t e f o r the VS-AT task i s followed by increased e r r o r s on the VS-VT task. Seven out of 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 that s p a t i a l to temporal i n t e g r a t i o n s w i t h i n v i s i o n are more d i f f i c u l t than s p a t i a l to temporal i n t e g r a t i o n s which also i n v o l v e a s h i f t from v i s u a l to a u d i t o r y . Bryden's d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t s may r e f l e c t higher 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 tasks 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 tasks. Given these d i f f e r e n c e s , i t would appear that the present study presents a more r e a l i s t i c p i c t u r e of the d i f f i c u l t y of the p u r e l y temporal tasks w i t h VT standards than does the Bryden study. Stimulus Elements and Matching Task Performance The nature of the i n i t i a l stimulus would appear to be of key importance f o r sensory i n t e g r a t i o n . O'Connor and Hermelin (1972) demonstrated that the modality of input 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 o r g a n i z e d or encoded s p a t i a l l y o r t e m p o r a l l y . There can be no q u e s t i o n t h a t s p a t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n i s b e s t o r g a n i z e d v i s u a l l y and t h a t poor r e a d e r s have a v i s u a l s p a t i a l s t r e n g t h . The v e r y s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r s t a n d a r d s t i m u l u s i n the p r e s e n t s t u d y was due l a r g e l y to the much lower e r r o r s c o r e s of t a s k s w i t h VS i n i t i a l s t i m u l i , combined w i t h h i g h e r e r r o r s c o r e s f o r t a s k s w i t h VT s t a n d a r d s . However, when the t a s k c a l l s f o r v i s u a l temporal performance w i t h i n i t i a l temporal s t i m u l i i n the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y , i t i s the t a s k demand r a t h e r than the m o d a l i t y o f i n p u t t h a t d e t e r m i n e s whether the i n f o r m a t i o n i s encoded t e m p o r a l l y o r s p a t i a l l y . Thus i t i s the s p a t i a l o r temporal e n c o d i n g f a c i l i t y of the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y t h a t i s invoked by the n a t u r e of the i n i t i a l s t i m u l i i n t h e matching t a s k . High r e a d i n g boys were e q u a l l y a b l e a t temporal p r o c e s s i n g i n b o t h 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 . High g i r l s had more d i f f i c u l t y w i t h VT s t i m u l i but were s t i l l more a b l e than low r e a d e r s . There was a s l i g h t tendency f o r p u r e l y temporal matching t a s k s to be e a s i e r w i t h i n i t i a l AT s t i m u l i than w i t h i n i t i a l VT s t i m u l i . With AT comparison s t i m u l i h a l f t h e t a s k s were e a s i e r than w i t h VT comparisons and h a l f were more d i f f i c u l t . AT and VT s t a n d a r d s w i t h VS comparisons were a p p r o x i m a t e l y e q u a l i n d i f f i c u l t y . R e s u l t s of the f a c t o r a n a l y s e s showed t h a t t a s k s l o a d e d on the s p a t i a l and temporal dimensions r a t h e r than 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 , w i t h h i g h r e a d e r s more v e r s a t i l e a t p r o c e s s i n g temporal 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 . Thus i t seems t h a t w h i l e the v i s u a l m o d a l i t y as the m o d a l i t y o f i n p u t may be p r e d i s p o s e d to p r o c e s s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n s p a t i a l l y , i t has a s t r o n g c a p a c i t y f o r p r o c e s s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n t e m p o r a l l y . However when the i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s i s v i s u a l and temporal, the poor r e a d e r seems more bound by the s p a t i a l p r o c e s s i n g tendency than the good r e a d e r . 95 Bryden (1972) suggested that an i n i t i a l VS stimulus gave higher matching scores, not simply because they are e a s i e r to match, but because they are e a s i e r to remember or to organize c o n c e p t u a l l y . L i k e w i s e , i n i t i a l temporal s t i m u l i ( e s p e c i a l l y VT) gave lower matching scores because temporal o r g a n i z a t i o n was more d i f f i c u l t and the v i s u a l modality l e s s adept at temporal o r g a n i z a t i o n . I t seems f a i r to add that t h i s r e f l e c t s the nature of t e m p o r a l i t y r a t h e r than a modality d e f i c i t , and that f a c i l i t y f o r a p p r o p r i - ate use of these two c a p a c i t i e s of the v i s u a l modality, as r e q u i r e d by the task, a l s o c o n t r i b u t e s to b e t t e r matching performance. Thus part of the problem of r e l a t i v e task performance i s bound up i n the modality of i n p u t , p a r t i n the s p a t i a l or temporal dimension i n which the v i s u a l modality i s o p e r a t i n g , as set by the i n i t i a l s t i m u l i , and part 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 using nine t a s k s , the tasks are given rank order of d i f f i c u l t y , the f o l l o w i n g order i s found. E a s i e s t are those with VS standards, f i r s t VS-VS then VS-AT and then VS-VT. Next and equal i n d i f f i c u l t y are the two remaining tasks w i t h VS comparisons, AT-VS and VT-VS. The next two most d i f f i c u l t are AT-AT and then AT-VT, two tasks w i t h AT standards, the c r o s s - modal VT comparison being more d i f f i c u l t than the intramodal match. Next most d i f f i c u l t i s VT-VT, an intramodal match w i t h i n the temporal dimension, 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 temporal dimension, VT-AT. Thus the two intramodal matches w i t h i n v i s i o n stand almost at the two 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. The f i r s t and t h i r d most d i f f i c u l t tasks are cross-modal matches w i t h i n the temporal dimension, 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. Tasks requiring two integrations f a l l in the group of easier tasks with VS standards being easier than AT standards. These composite results contra- dict or qualify Bryden's (1972) findings that cross-modal shifts are more d i f f i c u l t , and that spatial-temporal integrations within vision are more d i f f i c u l t than cross-modal integrations within the temporal dimension. Cross-modal shifts 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 shifts within vision are easier than cross-modal integrations. The findings lend support to the Kuhlman and Wolking (1972) view that cross- modal and intramodal matches are similar in 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 qualified by the paifwise comparisons made to examine the assumptions of the modal-specific view of sensory functioning. Friedes (1974) reinterpreted the modal-specific view in terms of information complexity. The modal-specific view must be qualified also in terms of the characteristics of the information processor. Processing temporal information in the visual modality was only significantly more d i f f i c u l t for poorer readers. Similarly cross- modal integration in the temporal dimension was only significantly more d i f f i c u l t for low readers. Other cross-modal matches were insignificantly more or less d i f f i c u l t than intramodal matches. Thus, there was no support for the view that cross-modal integration is a higher order process of sensory integration. Results of the factor analyses for both reading.groups added support to this refutation. It appears also that Friedes* (1974) reinterpretation with regard to 97 stimulus complexity also needs further qualification. Friedes concluded that the modality specific 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 specific view only appears to hold true for low readers, then Friedes' view needs modification since good readers process temporal information effectively in the visual modality. Alternatively, i f Friedes' conclusion that simple tasks c a l l for non-modal processing and complex tasks c a l l for modality specific process- ing, there could be a switch of processing style called for in the middle of a test where item complexity progressed from simple to complex. Poorer readers may begin with one perceptual set, e.g. spatial, and when complex patterns c a l l for temporal processing, they may have d i f f i c u l t y making the switch. This would correspond with poor readers' d i f f i c u l t y with inter- sensory perceptual shifts. It would also be a plausible explanation of why 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 direction of focus indicated by this study is more to the processing of information as determined by the adeptness of the input modality, in inter-action with the spatial and temporal characteristics of the input stimuli which set the requirements of the task. The explora- tory factor analyses investigated the cognitive processing characteristics of good and poor readers. The results indicated that for good readers, temporal stimulus input is processed similarly by visual or auditory modalities depending on the task requirements. Poorer readers on the other hand appear to demonstrate lack of adeptness, or confusion in the. processing of temporal information where the visual modality is involved. The introductory items of each of the matching tasks established the 98 task requirements 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 temporal i n t e g r a t i o n . The order of p r e s e n t a t i o n of the stimulus elements determined the type of i n t e g r a t i o n or processing r e q u i r e d . Then the developed adept- ness of the input modality of the i n d i v i d u a l processor determined how w e l l the task was performed. From the f a c t o r analyses and the p a i r w i s e compari- sons, poorer readers appeared to be l e s s adept at processing temporal in f o r m a t i o n i n the v i s u a l modality, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the absence of a VS task element. Poorer readers appeared to be bound by the s p a t i a l encoding f a c i l i t y of the v i s u a l modality. Not only d i d t h i s f a c i l i t y appear to over- r i d e temporal processing requirements i n terms of modality 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 imulus, but a l s o i t appeared to o v e r - r i d e the temporal processing requirements of the task i t s e l f , by over-emphasis on s p a t i a l aspects of the task, even i f they occurred as the comparison s t i m u l i . In the f a c t o r a n a l y s i s f o r low readers, the two tasks w i t h temporal standards which loaded 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 to the l i n k between temporal and s p a t i a l stimulus 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 strong main e f f e c t f o r the standard stimulus was due to the combined i n f l u e n c e of the VT and VS elements. The main e f f e c t f o r the comparison s t i m u l i was due s o l e l y to the i n f l u e n c e of the VS element. The i m p l i c a t i o n seems to be that the VT of s e q u e n t i a l element i s of p a r t i c u l a r i n f l u e n c e as an i n i t i a l stimulus i n sensory i n t e g r a t i o n . D i f f e r e n t i a l a b i l i t i e s a t processing VT s t i m u l i d i s t i n g u i s h between good and poor readers whereas a b i l i t y at processing VS s t i m u l i does not. Matching tasks 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 c o r r e l a t e d w i t h reading measures f o r high readers, 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 readers i t was the VS-VS task that was s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d 99 with word recognition. The implication is that temporal-spatial shifts within the visual modality are particularly called for in the reading process, and that more able readers demonstrate a greater f a c i l i t y in making those shifts, especially 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 spatial a b i l i t i e s are more closely associated with adequacy at decoding. Poorer readers, who have a spatial strength, are weak at decoding. O'Connor and Hermelin (1972) highlighted the capacity of the input modality to induce a temporal or spatial set for the processing of the information. It would seem that for poorer readers, when the input modality is visual but the task requirement set by the standard stimulus i s temporal processing, an inappropriate set for spatial encoding may occur. In Friedes' (1974) terminology, information input for the less adept temporal aspect of visual processing is translated into the code of the most adept spatial aspect of the visual modality. This could well be classed as a "compensatory enhancement" (Friedes, 1974, p";.285) of the spatial processing strength of the visual modality for poorer readers. This may also be the explanation why visual to auditory switches for poorer readers are more d i f f i c u l t than auditory to visual, as found in this study and in other studies (Estes & Huizinga, 1974; Vande Voort, Senf & Benton, 1972). This VS processing characteristic of poorer readers may contribute to an effect which was evident in the item analysis data. 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 concentration of e r r o r s . A v i s u a l - s p a t i a l s t r e n g t h favours primacy (Friedes, 1974). Very few of the items were d i s c r i m i n a t i n g where the point of d i f f e r e n c e was a t the beginning of the stimulus p a t t e r n s . This tendency could be explored f u r t h e r by f u t u r e s t u d i e s . A f u r t h e r area of research could a l s o be the r e l a t i n g of modal preference and other measures of modality s t r e n g t h to performance of good and poor readers on i n t e g r a t i o n tasks. Emphasis on the processing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the i n d i v i d u a l reader i n e v i t a b l y takes 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 temptation to view the discussed f i n d i n g s i n the l i g h t of neuropsychological l i t e r a t u r e such as that d e a l i n g w i t h hemispheric f u n c t i o n of the b r a i n (Dimond & Beaumont, 1974; Kimura, 1963; M i l n e r , 1971), p a r t i c u l a r l y hemispheric involvement 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 or i n simultaneous and successive processing (Cohen, 1973). B u t t e r s and Brody (1968) were among the few researchers to r e l a t e s p e c i f i c c o r t i c a l 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 not impair intramodal or cross-modal matching. 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 subjects t h i s would be a f u t i l e e x e r c i s e . In compromise there does seem to be a j u s t i f i c a t i o n however f o r viewing the d i s c u s s i o n i n the l i g h t of t h e o r e t i c a l views of those working i n the f i e l d of b r a i n science and brain-behaviour r e l a t i o n s h i p s which are p e r t i n e n t to m o d a l - s p e c i f i c i t y and i n f o r m a t i o n processing and which are a p p l i c a b l e to d i f f e r e n c e s i n reading a b i l i t y . The t h e o r i e s of L u r i a (1966, 1973) appear to be most r e l e v a n t i n t h i s regard. Working from s t u d i e s of c o r t i c a l 101 lesions, Luria rejects both the idea of the undifferentiated functioning of the brain and that of the narrow localization of function. He postulates three basic co-operating zones of the brain, each with different cortical function and relationship to sensory modalities. The three zones are organized on a hierarchical basis in terms of neural development and dimin- ishing modal specificty. The primary areas of the upper brain stem and reticular formation are involved with arousal, motivation, information reception and analysis. They are most modality specific. The secondary areas (occipital, parietal and temporal regions) subserve sensory input, visual and auditory analysis and coding and storage of information, being highly modality specific. The tertiary block includes the large area of the frontal lobes subserving the most complex behaviours, the function being non-modality specific. A l l three of the areas identified by Luria work together to subserve perception and the development of a b i l i t i e s resulting from educational experiences. Thus poor reading performance and sensory integration perform- ance which is more tied to modality specifics can be seen in the develop- mental hierarchy put forward. Whether or not i t i s neurological impairment, a maturational lag, or inadequate learning experience which is 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 cross-modal inadequacies as having dominant parietal lobe weaknesses. It seems more acceptable to view an inadequacy of sensory integration by poorer readers as placing them somewhere on a continuum of developed expertise in informa- tion processing. It is on the establishing of this status that remediation can be based. Closely related to the modality matching approach and arising out of the 102 work of Luria is the approach of simultaneous and successive syntheses in information processing. Simultaneous processing involves integration of sensory stimuli into essentially spatial groupings, being subserved by the secondary area of the cortex. This processing deals with global and relational concepts. Simultaneous synthesis is also involved in comparative, spatial and logical relationship concepts as expressed in language (Cummins & Das, 1977). Successive processing, linked to the tertiary area of the cortex, subserves integration of stimuli into temporal series as in auto- matic sequential s k i l l s . Studies using the simultaneous and successive syntheses paradigm in relation to reading, and using a variety of meaningful content and memory tasks, suggest that among children who are likely to experience d i f f i c u l t y in reading, successive processing is highly related to reading a b i l i t y , while better reading is more related to simultaneous processing (Cummins & Das, 1977; Doehring, 1968). Kirby and Das (1977) added the emphasis that both forms of processing were important 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 for the applica- b i l i t y of simultaneous and successive processing to research in reading d i f f i c u l t i e s . Since VS stimuli in matching tasks are simultaneous in presentation, while a l l temporal stimuli are successive, there is 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 visual- spatial s k i l l s , (b) the heavy emphasis on the VS element which is a feature of poor readers' matching task performance in the present study, (c) the modality-specific nature of the secondary zone function which subserves simulteaneous synthesis and visuo-spatial relationships, the value 103 of these approaches to the study of reading d i f f i c u l t i e s appears to be well established. Kirby and Das (1977) concuded that " i t is only on the basis of this type of research into the underlying processing deficits 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 visual modality. The present study indicated clearly that poorer readers are significantly 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 clearly impaired (Doehring, 1968; Leong, Note 1; Rugel, 1974). What are the implications of these findings on modality integration for remediation? While this 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 direct .remedial principles? Reading clearly involves a mixture of sensory integrations. Spatially perceived units (whole or part words or phrases) are integrated with other spatially organized units in a sequential (visual and temporal) manner. Spatially and temporally perceived (visual) units are also integrated with phonic or phonetic units as graphic symbols become associated with oral-auditory vocabulary. Thus f l e x i b i l i t y in the f u l l variety of sensory integrations is called-for in proficient reading. This f l e x i b i l i t y would also extend to selective 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 in 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 visual modality more flexibly and appropriately (Gibson, 1970). In learning or decoding stages, the integration demands of the visual 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, visual spatial adeptness in integration would be more appropriate. Looking at the processing characteristics of good readers i t is apparent that they have strong VS a b i l i t i e s . They are also able to integrate visual temporal and auditory temporal information equally well as called- 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 called-for this adeptness is brought to bear on the task. Poorer readers on the other hand appear to be more bound by the VS adeptness of the visual modality and process information in- appropriately by over-use or over-compensation in this aspect of modal function, being locked into modal-specific aspects of cortical functioning. This could be explained in terms of neurological damage or slower matur- ational development. It could be due to inadequate experience in language, in perceptual motor s k i l l s or in general perceptual organization which is demanding of sequential relating and processing of information. Whatever the explanation, the child's needs would be the same - planned, progressive and broadly based rich experience in developmental language and reading activities. This would not mean perceptual training exercises such as matching patterns of light flashes, beeps and dots, but perceptual training that is intrinsic 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, spatially and temporally presented words and word elements. Using timed presentation techniques, letters or syllables could be matched and subsequently pronounced. This would u t i l i z e VS s k i l l s , observing distinctive characteristics.etc., but calling for integration, and adding sound association (cross-modal integration) to the spatial integra- tion. Further stages would c a l l for matching larger units of whole words or phrases, followed by pronunciation. In parallel could be presentation of sequences of syllables, increasing in number and complexity, f i r s t calling for matching and then blending. Again in parallel could be the cross-modal matching of visual elements (syllables, words) both spatially and sequentially with heard syllables or words, calling for simple matching and then vocalizing. Similarly the auditory elements could precede the visual-spatial and visual-sequential elements or be followed by matching auditory elements. Part of the process could require anticipation or visualization of what the equivalent match would be, followed by actual presentation of the comparison stimulus. These practices would lead naturally to writing and spelling 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 child at handling both intramodal and inter-modal aspects of integration. For remediating more basic d i f f i c u l t i e s the same principles could be used with pic t o r i a l or alphabetic materials as stimuli 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 to g r a d u a l l y decrease 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 and to increase the a b i l i t y of v i s i o n to handle both s p a t i a l and temporal s t i m u l i . This would be i n the context of meaningful p i c t o r i a l , o r a l and v e r b a l m a t e r i a l s . Bakker's w r i t i n g (1967) would support the naming and r e t e n t i o n of temporal 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 that c h i l d r e n r a t e d low i n reading 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 gains 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 m a t e r i a l s (Buckland & Balow, 1973). I t seems c l e a r that poor readers i n c l u d e those who have e i t h e r a u d i t o r y - 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 those who have both (Doehring, 1968). The present 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. Friedes (1974) would add a fourth"group to i n c l u d e those f o r whom none of the forementioned c o n d i t i o n s apply. Likewise Torgesen (1975) suggests t h a t research i n d i c a t e s that the r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading a b i l i t y and perceptual 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 subsets of perceptual f u n c t i o n i n g . I t would seem that a remedial 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 spectrum of i n f l u e n c e i n view of such a wide range of 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 area of research could be to use the suggested p r i n c i p l e s i n a remedial program and to conduct an experimental study on the e f f i c a c y of the program i n improving reading. Appropriate use of the modality f u n c t i o n s i n blending v i s u a l l y and a u d i t o r i l y perceived phonemes, graphemes and l a r g e r u n i t s , would presumably help i n preventing over-compensatory use of VS adeptness. This would place each of the phonic and s i g h t word approaches to reading i n dynamic balance. A dominantly VS approach to reading would place undue emphasis on the primacy 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 characteristic of the poorer readers. The visual input of VS patterns is slower than for VT patterns. The poorer reader often dwells too long on the elements of words. These characteristics may accentuate some of the inappropriate use of the visual modality by under- use of the temporal processing capacity of this modality. The skilled reader on the other hand is less bound by the VS element in word recognition (Smith, 1971). The dynamic balance would thus be not only between visual and auditory, but also between spatial and temporal integration experience. A general aim would be to reduce the degree of modality specific processing of information by giving experience in flexible use of modalities in 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 vision through matching, pronouncing, writing and spelling. It is possible that modal preference would play a part, and the importance of such a bias would need to be examined in further research. The presence of a preferential bias would not reduce the need for rich experience in 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 syllable rather than the phoneme is the more natural perceptual unit in beginning reading, this would seem to reinforce the idea of attaining a balance between analytical spatial and synthetic sequential use of modalities. Such a balance would draw upon both the integrative and differentiative functions 108 of m o d a l i t i e s i n processing the i n f o r m a t i o n . While b e t t e r reading performance would demonstrate processing of l a r g e r manageable u n i t s of p r i n t , undue emphasis would not be placed upon the g l o b a l VS element. In a t t a i n i n g the balance, 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 small s p a t i a l u n i t s would a l s o be avoided. I t was 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 readers i n the i n t e g r a t i o n of sensory i n f o r m a t i o n and of t h e i r s t a t u s i n terms of modality adeptness that t h i s study had i t s aims. E f f e c t i v e remediation of reading d i f f i c u l t i e s depends upon understanding 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 given to 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 or 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 tasks, i n the present study, but the w r i t e r does not consider these to be unimportant i n f l u e n c e s to take i n t o account. While these f a c t o r s g e n e r a l l y operate together i n v a r y i n g degrees of c o n t r i b u t o r y importance, each one which i n f l u e n c e d a s p e c i f i c , poor reading performance would need to be d e a l t w i t h by s p e c i f i c remedial measures. I f , and to what degree, sensory i n t e g r a t i o n inadequacies l i m i t reading 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 d e l i n e a t e d and r e l a t e d to the body of e x i s t e n t knowledge of p s y c h o l o g i c a l and neuropsychological theory, and of the reading process. Such was the i n t e n t of t h i s study. 109 REFERENCE NOTES 1. Leong, C K . C o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s u n d e r l y i n g r e a d i n g d e f i c i t . Paper p r e s e n t e d a t the 4th". I n t e r n a t i o n a l Congress, 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 Study 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. Jarman, 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 system 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 - temporal s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s f o r use i n cross-modal and i n t r a m o d a l 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 order, meaningfulness and reading a b i l i t y . Percep- t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1967, 24, 1027-1030. Baiter, L., & Fogarty, J. Intra - and ititersensory matching by nursery school c h i l d r e n . Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1971, 3_3, 467-472. Bannatyne, A. The transfer from modality perceptual to modality concep- t u a l . In H.K. Smith (Ed.), Perception and reading. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1968. Barrett, T.C. The evaluation of children's reading achievement. Newark: International Reading Association, 1969. Becker, J.T., & Sabatino, D. R e l i a b i l i t y of i n d i v i d u a l tests of perception administered u t i l i z i n g group techniques. Journal of C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1971, 27, 86-88. Beery, J.W. Matching of auditory and v i s u a l s t i m u l i by average and retarded readers. C h i l d Development, 1967, 38, 827-833. Belmont, I. Requirements of the early reading task. Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1974, 38, 527-537. Belmont, L., Birch, H.G. & Belmont, I. Auditory-visual intersensory pro- cessing and verbal mediation. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1968, 147, 562-569. Bentzen, F. Sex r a t i o s i n learning and behaviour disorders. American Journal of Orthosychiatry, 1963, 33, 92-98. Birch, H.G., & Belmont, L. Auditory-visual i n t e g r a t i o n i n normal and retarded readers. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1964, 34, 852-862. Birch, H.G., & Belmont, L. Auditory-visual i n t e g r a t i o n and reading a b i l i t y i n school c h i l d r e n . Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1965, 2_0, 295-305. Birch, H.G., & Bitterman, M.E. Reinforcement and learning: The process of sensory i n t e g r a t i o n . Psychological Review, 1949, 5_6_, 292-308. Birch, H.G., & Bitterman, M.E. Sensory Integration and cognitive theory. Psychological Review, 1951, 5j8, 355-361. Blank, M., & Bridger, W.H. Cross-modal transfer i n nursery-school c h i l d r e n . Journal of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology, 1964, 5_8, 277-282. Blank, M., & Bridger, W.H. Conceptual cross-modal transfer i n deaf and hearing c h i l d r e n . C h i l d Development, 1966, _3_7, 29-38. I l l 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 cross- modal matching and cross-modal transfer. Cortex, 1968, h_, 127-137. Bryden, M.P. Auditory-visual and sequential-spatial matching in relation to reading a b i l i t y . Child Development, 1972, 43_, 824-832. Buckland, P., & Balbw, B. Effect of visual perceptual training on reading achievement. Exceptional Children, 1973, 39, 299-304. Buros, O.K. The Seventh Mental Measurements Yearbook, Vol. II, New Jersey: Gryphon, 1972. Buktenica, N.A. Perceptual screening: Toward identification, prediction and prevention of reading d i s a b i l i t i e s . Bulletin of the Orton Society, 1970, 20, 72-80. Butters, N., & Brody, B.A. The role of the l e f t parietal lobe in the mediation of intra- and cross-modal associations. Cortex, 1968, 4_, 328-342. Cattell, R.B. Factor analysis: An introduction to essentials I. The purpose and underlying models. Biometrics, 1965, 2_1_, 190-215, (a). Cattell, R.B. Factor analysis: An introduction to essentials II. The role of factor analysis in research. Biometrics, 1965, 22^, 405-435, (b). Chalfant, J.C., & Flathouse, V.E. Auditory and visual learning. In H.R. Myklebust (Ed.), Progress in Learning Disabilities Vol. II. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1971. Chalfant, J.C., & Scheffelin, M.A. Central processing dysfunctions in 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 of reading. Journal of Educational Research, 1974, 67, 403-411. Cohen, G. Hemispheric differences in serial versus parallel processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973, 9_7, 349-356. Cole, M., Chorover, S.L., & Ettlinger, G. Cross-modal transfer in man. Nature, 1961, 191, 1225-1226. Connolly, K., & Jones, B. A developmental study of afferent-reafferent integration. British Journal of Psychology, 1970, jj]L, 259-266. Cronbach, L.J. Test validation. 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 in the human brain. London: Elek Science, 1974. Doehring, D.G. Patterns of impairment in specific 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 disability. 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 in reading: An evaluation and a critique 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. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1969, 29_, 565-570. Elkind, D. Piaget's theory of perceptual development: Its application to reading and special education. Journal of Special Education, 1967, 1, 351-367. Estes, R.E., & Huizinga, R.J. A comparison of visual and auditory presentations of a paired-associate learning:-task with learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Di s a b i l i t i e s , 1974, 7_, 35-42. Ettlinger, G. Analysis of cross-modal effects and their relationship to language. In C.H. Millikan 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. Sta t i s t i c a l tables for biological, agricultural and medical research, (6th ed.). London: Oliver & Boyd, 1963. Ford, M. Auditory-visual and tactual-visual integration in relation 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: Cross- modal functions, information complexity, memory and de f i c i t . Psychological Bulletin, 1974, 81, 284-310. Freides, D. Information complexity and cross-modal functions. British Journal of Psychology, 1975, 66, 283-287. Gates, A.I., & MacGinitie, W.H. Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests. New York: Teachers College Press, 1965. Gates, A.I., & MacGinitie, W.H. Technical manual. Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests. New York: Teachers College Press, 1972. Gibson, E.J. Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crof ts, 1969.' 113 Gibson, E.J. The ontogeny of reading. American P s y c h o l o g i s t , 1970, 25, , 136-143. Gibson, E.J., and L e v i n , A. The psychology of reading. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1975. Goodnow, J . J . Matching 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 of m o d a l i t i e s i n perceptual and c o g n i t i v e develop- ment. In J.P. H i l l (Ed.), Minnesota Symposia on C h i l d Psychology, V. Minneapolis: U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota Press, 1971 (b). Gredler, G.R. Severe reading d i s a b i l i t y - some important c o r r e l a t e s . In J.F. Reid (Ed.), Reading: Problems and P r a c t i c e s . London: Ward Lock, 1972. Groenendaal, H.A., & Bakker, D.J. The part played by mediation processes i n the r e t e n t i o n of temporal sequences by two reading groups. Human Development, 1971, 14, 62-70. Hage, D.S., & Stroud, J.B. 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 scores, v e r b a l and nonverbal. J o u r n a l of Educational Research, 1959, 52, 258-262. Hakstian, A.R., & Bay, K.S. Users' manual to accompany the A l b e r t a General Factor A n a l y s i s Program. D i v i s i o n of Educational Research 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. Hammill, D.D., & Larsen, 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 reading a b i l i t y . J o u r n a l of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1974, ]_, 429-435. Hardy, M., Stennett, R.G., & Smythe, P.C. Auditory segmentation'arid a u d i t o r y blending i n r e l a t i o n to beginning reading. A l b e r t a J o u r n a l of Educational Research, 1973, 19_, 144-158. Holloway, 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 delayed c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1971, 4_, 204-208. Huey, E.B. The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1968. 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 stimulus patterns f o r use i n cross-modal and intramodal matching t e s t s . Behaviour Research Methods and Instrumentation, 1977, 9_, 22-25 (a). Jarman, R.F. P a t t e r n s of cross-modal and intramodal matching among i n t e l l - igence groups. In P. M i t t l e r (Ed.), Research to p r a c t i c e i n mental r e t a r d a t i o n ( V o l . I I ) . Baltimore: U n i v e r s i t y Park P r e s s , 1977 (b) . Jarman, R.F. Cross-modal and intramodal matching: R e l a t i o n s h i p s to s i m u l - taneous and successive syntheses and l e v e l s of performance among three 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 Educational Research, 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 processing and i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t i e s . I n t e l l i g e n c e , i n press. Johnson, D.D. Sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n reading across c u l t u r e s . Reading Research Q u a r t e r l y , 1973, 9_, 67-86. Jones, B., & Robinson, T. Sensory i n t e g r a t i o n i n normal and retarded c h i l d r e n . Developmental Psychology, 1973, 9, 178-182. Jones, J.P. A study 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 - sensory perceptual s h i f t i n g , modal preference, and reading achievement at 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. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan). Jorgenson, 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 reading perform- ance i n lower 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 Psychology, 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 reading achievement. P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1968, 2̂ 7, 459-468. K a r l i n , R. Teaching elementary reading. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1975. 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 Psychology, 1963, 56, 899-902. K i r b y , J.R., & Das, J.P. Reading achievement, I.Q., and simultaneous-successive processing. J o u r n a l of Educational Psychology, 1977, 69_, 564-570. K i r k , R.E. Experimental design: Procedures 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 . : Brooks/Cole, 1968. Klapper, Z.S., & B i r c h , H.G. Developmental course of temporal 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., & Wolking, W.D. Development of w i t h i n - and cross-modal matching 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 Psychology, 1972, ]_, 365. Lehman, E.B., & Goodnow, J . Memory f o r rhythmic s e r i e s : Age changes i n accuracy and number coding. Developmental Psychology, 1972, b_, 363. Lorge, I . , Thorndike, R.L., & Hagen, E. Canadian Lorge-Thorndike I n t e l l i g e n c e Tests. Canada: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1967. Lorge, I . , Thorndike,' R.L., & Hagen, E. Canadian Lorge-Thorndike I n t e l l i g e n c e Tests. T e c h n i c a l Supplement. Canada: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1972. Lubin, 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 . E d u cational and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 1961, 21, 807-817. 115 Luria, A.R. Higher cortical functions in man. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966. Luria, A.R. The working brain: An introduction to neuropsychology. New York: Basic Books Inc., 1973. MacGinitie, W.H. Evaluating readiness for 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. Visual and auditory learning processes in normal children and children with specific 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 first-grade reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 1971, 6̂, 472-492. Milner, A.D., & Bryant, P.E. Cross-modal matching by young children. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1970, 7_1, 453-458. Milner, B. Interhemispheric differences in the localization of psychological processes in man. British Medical Bulletin, 1971, 2_7, 272-277. Muehl, S., & Kremenak, S. Ability to match information within and between auditory and visual 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 for f i r s t grade reading potential. Journal of Learning Di s a b i l i t i e s , 1973, _6, 383-388. O'Connor, N., & Hermelin, B. Inter- and intramodal transfer in children with modality specific general handicaps. British Journal of Social 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. Per- ception and Psychophysics, 1972, 11, 46-48. Ogston, D.G. The technical standards of intellective tests used in Alberta elementary schools: A review. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 1973, 19, 270-283. Pollack, C. Neuropsychological aspects of reading and writing. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 1976, 26, 19-33. Rae, G. Relation of auditory-visual integration to reading and intelligence. Journal of General Psychology, 1977, 9_7_, 3-8. Reilly, D.H. Auditory-visual integration, sex, and reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971, 62_, 482-486. Robinson, H.M. Visual and auditory modalities related to methods for 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 Psycho- physics, 1971, 9_, 385-390. Rudnick, M., Martin, V., & Sterritt, G.M. On the relative d i f f i c u l t y of auditory and visual, temporal and spatial, integrative and non- integrative sequential pattern comparisons. Psychonomic Science, 1972, 27, 207-210. Rudnick, M., Sterri t t , G.M., & Flax, M. Auditory and visual 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 Disabil- i t i e s , 1974, 7_, 48-55. Sawyer, D. The diagnostic mystique: A point of view. Reading Teacher, 1974, 27, 555-561. Sharan, S., & Calfee, R. The relation of auditory, visual, and auditory- visual matching to reading performance of Israeli children. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1977, 130, 151-189. Silverston, R.A. & Deichmann, J.W. Sense modality research and the acqui- sition 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 visual inadequacies in maturation at the f i r s t grade level. Journal of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1972, 5_, 620-625. Sterritt, G.M., Martin, V., & Rudnick, M. Auditory-visual and temporal- spatial integration as determinants of test d i f f i c u l t y . Psychonomic Science, 1971, 23, 289-291. Sterrit t , G.M., & Rudnick, M. Auditory and visual rhythm perception in relation to reading a b i l i t y in 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 in reading. Newark: International Reading Association, 1968. Timm, N.H. Multivariate analysis with applications in education and psychology. Monterey: Brooks/Cole, 1975. Torgesen, J. Problems and prospects in the study of learning disabilties. In E.M. Hetherington (Ed.), Review of child development research Vol. 5. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975. Tower, D.M. A kindergarten screening index to predict reading failure. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 1973, 25, 90-105. 117 Vande Voort, L. , & Serif, G.M. Audiovisual integration in retarded readers. Journal of Learning Di s a b i l i t i e s , 1973, 6̂  170-174. Vande Voort, L., Senf, G.M., & Benton, A.L. Development of audiovisual integration in 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 . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971. 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 in 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 I T E M N U M B E R S T I M U L U S C O M P A R I S O N S A M E ( S ) / D I FFERENT (D ) E X A M P L E S 1 • • • • • • S 2 • • • • • • D 3 • • • • • • D 4 • • • • • • S 5 • • • • • • 0 T E S T I T E M S 6 • • • • • • • • S 7 • • • • • • • • D 8 • • • • • • • • D 9 • • • • • • • • S 10 • • • • • • • • 0 II • • • • • • • • S 12 • • • • • • • • S 13 • • • • • • • • D 14 • • • • • • • • • • S 15 • • • • • R E S T • • • • • R E S T S 16 • • • • • • • • • • D 17 • • • • • • • • • • D 18 • • • • • • • • • • S 19 • • • • • • • • • • 0 20 • • • • • • • • • • S 120 I T E M N U M B E R S T I M U L U S C O M P A R I S O N S A M E ( S ) / D IFFERENT(D ) 21 • • • • • D 22 • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 23 • • * * • • • • • • • • S 24 • • • • • • • • • • • • D 25 • • • • • • R E S T R E S T D 26 • • • • • • D 27 D 28 D 29 S 30 • • • • • • • S 31 • • • • • • • 0 32 • • • • • • • D 33 • • • • • • • 0 34 D 35 • • • • • • • • • • • • • S Figure 9. Matching task stimulus patterns. APPENDIX B SLIDE DURATION TIMING 122 S l i d e Duration Timing Using the o r i g i n a l c a s s e t t e tapes, the lengths of the blank spaces which represented a l l the v i s u a l - s p a t i a l stimulus presentations were timed and recorded. From the tone and pause dimensions the t o t a l d u r a t i o n of 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 recorded. These durations were then converted p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y to f i t the range of two to four seconds which was set 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 the l i t e r a t u r e and previous research (Jarman, 1978). These times (time a v a i l - able on the tape and time r e q u i r e d f o r presentation) were entered i n t o a d e t a i l e d s c r i p t of the tape. The next stage was to convert the tapes f o r use i n a s l i d e - s y n c audio- v i s u a l system. This system i s u s u a l l y comprised of a two t r a c k tape recorder and s l i d e p r o j e c t o r . One t r a c k of the recorder 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 (beeps). The other or cue t r a c k i s used f o r advancing 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 , set at the highest speed, 1\ i p s . The tape was then played back at 1 7/8 i p s (one quarter speed), during which time the cue tones f o r advancing the p r o j e c t o r were recorded on the other t r a c k . The d u r a t i o n time was m u l t i p l i e d by four and the tones were manually keyed using a s i g n a l generator (set at 250 Hz) and an e l e c t r o n i c stopwatch. A 0.8 sec. constant was added to the pe 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 playback machinery. This 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 at the o r i g i n a l speed onto a two t r a c k audio c a s s e t t e , s l i d e - s y n c tape recorder. The cue t r a c k , being 123 t r a n s f e r r e d at four times i t s recorded speed, showed a s l i d e d u r a t i o n e r r o r of no greater than ± 0.'2 sec. The i n a u d i b l e cue tones t r a n s f e r r e d at 1000 Hz (four times the o r i g i n a l recorded frequency) which f i t t e d the design of the f i n a l playback machinery. APPENDIX C VISUAL-TEMPORAL TEST CONSTRUCTION 125 V i s u a l - T e m p o r a l T e s t C o n s t r u c t i o n For c o n s t r u c t i o n o f the VT s t i m u l u s p a t t e r n s , a Wollensak 3M 2551 AV s l i d e / s y n c c a s s e t t e tape r e c o r d e r was used. I n a d d i t i o n , two e l e c t r o n i c c i r c u i t s (a tone decoder and a b i n a r y d i v i d e r ) were r e q u i r e d . The VT c o n d i t i o n r e q u i r e d t h a t a s m a l l i n c a n d e s c e n t lamp be f l a s h e d f o r the same d u r a t i o n and p a t t e r n as the a u d i b l e tone b u r s t s which were r e c o r d e d a t 1000 Hz. The tones to f l a s h the lamp c o u l d not be d i r e c t l y s e l e c t e d from the a u d i b l e t r a c k as t h i s was s t i l l r e q u i r e d and as 1000 Hz tones were i n h e r e n t i n the v e r b a l i n s t r u c t i o n s on t h a t t r a c k . The tones c o u l d not be d i r e c t l y t r a n s f e r r e d on to t h e cue t r a c k as t h i s t r a c k a l r e a d y c o n t a i n e d i n a u d i b l e 1000 Hz tones f o r s l i d e change cues. To overcome t h e s e problems, two e l e c t r o n i c c i r c u i t s were b u i l t . Tone decoder: The f i r s t o f t h e s e was a tone decoder c i r c u i t , c o m p r i s i n g an a m p l i f i e r , tone decoder and lamp d r i v e r . T h i s was connected d i r e c t l y t o the cue t r a c k r e c o r d - p l a y b a c k tape head. S i g n a l s from the head were a m p l i f i e d and sent to the tone decoder which was programmed t o respond to 500 Hz tones (± 10 Hz f o r tape speed v a r i a t i o n ) . The r e s p o n s e o f the decoder s i g n a l l e d t h e lamp d r i v e r t o t u r n on a s m a l l 12 v o l t , 100 m i l l i a m p i n c a n d e s c e n t lamp f o r t h e d u r a t i o n o f the 500 Hz tone b u r s t s . The decoder was c o u p l e d t o the tape r e c o r d e r by a 2-conductor s h i e l d e d c a b l e and the "sync o u t " of the r e c o r d e r was connected t o the "sync i n " of the decoder. An e x t e n s i o n c o r d t o t h e lamp was plugged i n t o a s o c k e t on the top o f the decoder. Power to the decoder was c o n t r o l l e d by a s w i t c h on the decoder box and power was i n d i c a t e d by the L.E.D. ( l i g h t e m i t t i n g d i o d e ) . A p r e s s - b u t t o n s w i t c h on top of the decoder p e r m i t t e d t e s t i n g and manual c o n t r o l o f the lamp. 126 Binary d i v i d e r : The second c i r c u i t was a b i n a r y d i v i d e r c i r c u i t . The o r i g i n a l , a u dible 1000 Hz tone b u r s t s were played back through t h i s c i r c u i t and d i v i d e d to 500 Hz. These 500 Hz tone b u r s t s were simultaneously re-recorded onto the i n a u d i b l e cue t r a c k . The s l i d e changer thus responded only to the 1000 Hz tones. The speaker output from the recorder was connected v i a a Y cord to an a u x i l l i a r y speaker and to the d i v i d e r input of the decoder. The volume c o n t r o l was set so that approximately 4.5 v o l t s p-p (peak to peak) AG was fed to the d i v i d e r i n p u t . This was the value r e q u i r e d f o r the d i v i d e r to operate p r o p e r l y . For tones recorded on the Wollensak 2551 AV recorder at 0 VTJ (100% modulation), an o s c i l l o s c o p e was placed on the d i v i d e r output and the volume c o n t r o l turned up u n t i l a s t a b l e square wave output of 500 Hz showed on the o s c i l l o s c o p e . An audible d i s t o r t i o n was then evident on the a u x i l l i a r y speaker. The output of the d i v i d e r was fed i n t o the sync input of the recorder v i a a s h i e l d e d 1-conductor cable. The output gain was c o n t r o l l e d v i a the out gain on the decoder. This was set f o r 1 v o l t AC nominal. Too l a r g e a s i g n a l caused the p r o j e c t o r to advance, w h i l e too small 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 Conditions C o n s t r u c t i o n of the f i v e new tapes f o r the a d d i t i o n of the v i s u a l - temporal element was thus achieved by d i v i d i n g the 1000 Hz a u d i b l e sound patterns on copies of the three o r i g i n a l tapes which contained the a u d i t o r y element, and simultaneously 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 original 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 stimuli altered i t became VT-AT, and when the comparison half was altered this became AT-VT. Thus a l l nine combinations of cross-modal and intramodal tasks were accounted for and presented in an accurate and consistent manner, with stimuli identical within the standard and comparison conditions, and across the visual and auditory temporal dimensions. Circuit Descriptions Power supply: The power supply provided i 15 volts DC and + 5 volts DC. The line level AC was transformed and rectified (DI - D4: see Figure 10) and f i l t e r e d (C17, C18). This voltage, ± 35 volts DC, was then regulated to + 15 volts DC by IC6 and to -15 volts DC by IC7. A +5 volts 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 affecting the divider. The signal was then fed to half of IC3, a dual binary divider. The divider output was fed to a unity gain Op. Amp. 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 via Cl, C2 to a differential amplifier IC1. The common mode rejection ration (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 S E C T i MOTOROLA MDA-920A-2 D1-D4 +15V DC o — — + 5VDC LM 340LAH LM 340T-15 C21 Figure 1 0 . Power supply. CO 129 by C6 and R6 (set to 500 Hz), the decoding section being set by the two loop f i l t e r s C7 and C8. The output of the decoder was inverted by Ql and fed to Q2 which acted as an inverter and lamp driver. The f i l t e r , C9, prevented superfluous oscillations. Switch SW1 was for manual operation of the lamp (see Figure 12). +5V 1C3 1, NAT. k CD4520 J3 TSPEAKER I INPUT J4 R15>— - 100K<> OUT f — - GAIN | TO SYNC. INPUT, MAX 2V RMS Figure 11. Divider section. SYNC. HEAD Figure 12. Tone decoder. +5V 20K(FREQUENCY ADJ.) APPENDIX D REVISED SLIDE PRESENTATION TIMES Table A Revised Slide Presentation Times Item Time 6. 1.1 sec. 7. 1.1 8. 1.5 9. 1.5 10. 1.75 11. 1.75 12. 1.75 13. 1.75 14. 1.6 15. 1.6 Item Time 16. 1.6 sec. 17. 1.6 18. 1.8 19. 2.2 20. 2.2 21. 2.2 22. 1.75 23. 2.0 24. 2.0 25. 2.0 Item Time 26. 2.25 27. 2.25 28. 2.5 29. 2.5 30. 1.8 31. 2.1 32. 2.1 33. 2.5 34. 2.75 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 Introducing Matching Tasks Test 8. Dots - l i g h t s , VS-VT. Today we are going to look a t some p i c t u r e s . We are al s o going to look at some f l a s h i n g l i g h t s . A l l of the p i c t u r e s w i l l be l i t t l e dots. A l l of the l i g h t s w i l l be f l a s h e s of a l i g h t bulb. We are going to play a kind of game w i t h these p i c t u r e s and l i g h t s . We are going to see i f some of the l i g h t s are the same as some of the dots. We w i l l a l s o see i f some of the l i g h t s are d i f f e r e n t from some of the dots. L e t ' s l o o k c a r e f u l l y at t h i s p i c t u r e ( ... ). Now l e t ' s look at these f l a s h e s of l i g h t ( ". ). Did you n o t i c e that the l i g h t s were not the same as the dots? L e t ' s look at them both again. Ready f o r the dots ( ••• ) and now the l i g h t s (. . . ) . The l i g h t s were not the same as the dots were they? They were d i f f e r e n t from each other. Let's compare some dots and l i g h t s that are the same as each other. Ready, ( ... ) and ( ... ). Those were the same as each other weren't they? How can we w r i t e on paper that the l a s t one was the same as the f i r s t one or was d i f f e r e n t from the f i r s t one? On the paper i n f r o n t of you the words same and d i f f e r e n t are w r i t t e n down f o r each set of dots and l i g h t s that we w i l l compare. Let's look at some more dots and l i g h t s and see how we would w r i t e down the answer. Ready, ( ... ) ( . . . ) . They were the same, weren't they? I f we look a t No. 1 on the page, the word same has a c i r c l e around i t to show that the dots and l i g h t s were the same as each other. L e t ' s look a t the dots and l i g h t s f o r No. 2. Ready;, ( ...) and (.! . .. ). The l i g h t s were d i f f e r e n t from the dots, weren't they? I f we look a t No. 2 on the page, a c i r c l e has been drawn round the word d i f f e r e n t to show that they were d i f f e r e n t . Let's l o o k at the dots 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 the word d i f f e r e n t f o r No. 3. Now, would you l i k e to t r y some? Use the p e n c i l to c i r c l e the r i g h t word a f t e r you have seen the dots and l i g h t s . Let's do No. 4. Ready, (. . and (. . . ) . (Pause f o r answer)„ Did you c i r c l e the word same f o r No. 4? That i s the r i g h t answer. Let's t r y another one - No. 5. Ready, (. . .) and (. . . ) . (Pause) Did you c i r c l e the word d i f f e r e n t f o r No. 5? That i s the r i g h t answer. Now we w i l l do some more of these using the tape recorder to give the i n s t r u c t i o n s . A f t e r each group of dots and l i g h t s , c i r c l e the r i g h t answer on your paper to show i f they were the same or i f they were d i f f e r e n t . A f t e r the word ready, be sure to watch and l i s t e n c a r e f u l l y so as not to miss the dots or 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 Boulevard, D e l t a

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 12 1
China 4 0
Russia 3 0
Portugal 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 8 23
Redmond 5 1
Beijing 4 0
Ashburn 2 0
Sunnyvale 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