Dataset Information

How Specific Are Learning Disabilities?

ABSTRACT: Despite historical emphasis on "specific" learning disabilities (SLDs), academic skills are strongly correlated across the curriculum. Thus, one can ask how specific SLDs truly are. To answer this question, we used bifactor models to identify variance shared across academic domains (academic g), as well as variance unique to reading, mathematics, and writing. Participants were 686 children ages 8 to 16. Although the sample was overselected for learning disabilities, we intentionally included children across the full range of individual differences in this study in response to growing recognition that a dimensional, quantitative view of SLD is more accurate than a categorical view. Confirmatory factor analysis identified five academic domains (basic reading, reading comprehension, basic math, math problem-solving, and written expression); spelling clustered with basic reading and not writing. In the bifactor model, all measures loaded significantly on academic g. Basic reading and mathematics maintained variance distinct from academic g, consistent with the notion of SLDs in these domains. Writing did not maintain specific variance apart from academic g, and evidence for reading comprehension-specific variance was mixed. Academic g was strongly correlated with cognitive g (r = .72) but not identical to it. Implications for SLD diagnosis are discussed.

SUBMITTER: Peterson RL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8277890 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How Specific Are Learning Disabilities?

Peterson Robin L RL McGrath Lauren M LM Willcutt Erik G EG Keenan Janice M JM Olson Richard K RK Pennington Bruce F BF

Journal of learning disabilities 20210114 6

Despite historical emphasis on "specific" learning disabilities (SLDs), academic skills are strongly correlated across the curriculum. Thus, one can ask how specific SLDs truly are. To answer this question, we used bifactor models to identify variance shared across academic domains (academic <i>g</i>), as well as variance unique to reading, mathematics, and writing. Participants were 686 children ages 8 to 16. Although the sample was overselected for learning disabilities, we intentionally inclu ...[more]

PMID: 33446025

Similar Datasets

Project description:We are searching for common gene expression alteration in the hippocampus of animal models of learning disabilities and in post-mortem human tissues derived from patients with cognitive deficits. Our study has three phases. In phase I, we want to investigate the changes in gene expression in a transgenic mouse line that shows impairments in hippocampal-dependent learning. These animals are overexpressing the RNA-binding protein HuD in the forebrain under the control of the alpha CAMKinII promoter. For phase II, we plan to characterize the hippocampus of another animal model of learning disabilities: fetal alcohol exposed (FAE) rats. Last, for phase III, we would like to examine gene expression changes in the hippocampus and other tissues from patients with schizophrenia. To test our hypothesis, in phase 2 of our project, we propose to compare the pattern of gene expression in our mouse model with that in the hippocampus of rats prenatally exposed to alcohol (FAE model). Our hypothesis is that learning disabilities have common neural substrates regardless of the origin of the disability being genetic, environmental of a combination of these two. To test this hypothesis, we plan to examine the pattern of gene expression in the hippocampus of animals and humans with cognitive deficits and use bioinformatics tools to identify common changes in gene expression in three of such conditions: a genetic model (HuD transgenic mice), an environmental model (FAE rats) and a model for combined environmental and genetic effects (patients with schizophrenia). All the animals are adult male Sprague-Dawley rats (age 90-100 days). Animals were divided in three diet groups and three experimental treatment conditions (9 conditions altogether). Three groups of pregnant rat dams were placed on different diet regimens: a liquid diet containing 5% alcohol (A) groups, a control group fed an isocaloric liquid diet without alcohol (B) and a group of rats fed lab chow ad libitum (C). Offspring from each of these groups were allowed to grow until adulthood and placed into each of three training groups: a contextual fear conditioned group (1), a non-learning stress control group (2) and a naive/unhandled group (3). Hippocampi were dissected and used to isolate total RNA from each rat diet and training condition. Initially, we will submit 18 samples as follows: 10 samples from training group 1 and 8 samples from training group 3 (training group 2 will be analyzed at a later date). The diet assignment for the 18 samples is: 8 samples from group A, 6 samples of group B and 4 samples of group C. Please note that I was able to enter only the first 8 samples, as the sample list does not hold 18 samples altogether. Keywords: dose response

Dataset Information

How Specific Are Learning Disabilities?

Publications

How Specific Are Learning Disabilities?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets