Do gifted children without specific learning disabilities read more efficiently than typically developing children?

As described in the literature, the GC in the present study had heterogeneous scores on the Wechsler Intelligence Scales. The GC performed better than TDC in assessments of the underlying skills of reading and when reading of meaningful texts. This advantage was lost in the absence of context, as shown by the lack of significant GC vs. TDC differences for reading meaningless texts and for spelling accuracy. Hence, GC presented a heterogeneous profile with regard to the underlying skills of reading and reading abilities. The present data should help to improve our understanding of GC's reading skills. In particular, it is now essential to determine which written language tests and which score thresholds are appropriate for identifying specific learning disorders in GC.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2024-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1436710
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Reading and Literacy Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.79
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do gifted children without specific learning disabilities read more efficiently than typically developing children?

Patrick C. Berquin, Laurent Lesecq, Laurent Querné, Laura Buffo et al.
1 citations
Frontiers in Psychology
Reading and Literacy Development
0.79
article

Do gifted children without specific learning disabilities read more efficiently than typically developing children?

Patrick C. Berquin, Laurent Lesecq, Laurent Querné, Laura Buffo, Béatrice Bourdin, Julie Gornes, Louise Corbel, A.G. Le Moing
article en
1 citations

Abstract

As described in the literature, the GC in the present study had heterogeneous scores on the Wechsler Intelligence Scales. The GC performed better than TDC in assessments of the underlying skills of reading and when reading of meaningful texts. This advantage was lost in the absence of context, as shown by the lack of significant GC vs. TDC differences for reading meaningless texts and for spelling accuracy. Hence, GC presented a heterogeneous profile with regard to the underlying skills of reading and reading abilities. The present data should help to improve our understanding of GC's reading skills. In particular, it is now essential to determine which written language tests and which score thresholds are appropriate for identifying specific learning disorders in GC.

Frontiers in PsychologyVol. 15
Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier (FR), Inserm (FR), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Amiens-Picardie (FR), Groupe de Recherche sur l'Alcool et les Pharmacodépendances (FR), Université de Picardie Jules Verne (FR)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Reading and Literacy Development
0.79
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.