Nomeação Rápida e Dislexia

Prévia do material em texto

Neuropsyehologia, 1976, Vol. 14, pp. 471 to 479. Pergamon Press. Printed in England. 
R A P I D ' A U T O M A T I Z E D ' N A M I N G ( R . A . N . ) : 
D Y S L E X I A D I F F E R E N T I A T E D F R O M O T H E R 
L E A R N I N G D I S A B I L I T I E S 
MARTHA BRIDGE DENCKLA and RITA G. RUDEL 
Department of Neurology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, 
Columbia University, New York, N.Y. 10032, U.S.A. 
(Received 10 August 1975) 
Abstract--Performance on tests requiring rapid repetitive naming of pictured objects, colors, 
letters and numbers differentiates dyslexic children not only from normal controls but also 
from non-dyslexic, otherwise learning-disabled children. A deficit in automatization of verbal 
responses to visual stimuli, not restricted to symbols, correlates specifically with dyslexia. That 
this defter is not part of a generalized slowing of reaction time is reflected in the higher mean 
performance I.Q. (WISC) of the dyslexic Ss, who also showed fewer signs of neurological 
impairment than did the non-dyslexic Ss. 
INTRODUCTION 
INABILITY to name colors is a frequently-reported sign in cases of alexia, or "pure word- 
blindness" [1, 2]. Such patients, although visually-perceptually unimpaired, not dysphasic 
in conversation, and capable of naming objects, demonstrate a striking cluster of failures 
to associate words, letters, and colors with their appropriate names [3]. Since the neuro- 
pathological lesions in acquired alexia (destruction of left visual cortex and splenium of 
corpus callosum) effectively "disconnect" remaining visual cortex from language areas, 
the clinical cluster lends itself to an explanation in terms of a "visual-verbal disconnection 
syndrome". The relative preservation of number and object naming is considered to be 
explicable in terms of greater tactual associations of these visual stimuli. 
H~CAEN [4] has pointed out that with lesions of the left occipital lobe "the association of 
alexia and colour agnosia is classic". More recently, H~CAEN et aL [5] have reported a 
case of acquired alexia with object and colour agnosia (but without agnosia for shapes, 
faces, or spatial coordinates). It has been demonstrated that patients suffering loss of the 
left occipital cortex, after a transient dramatic alexia and color agnosia "recover" to 
achieve a permanent state of painfully slow and laborious reading [6-8]. Such dyslexic 
patients are able to name colors but do so slowly when the conditions of color-naming 
are made more stressful, timed and repetitive [7]. Some children with developmental 
dyslexia demonstrate inability to name colors at all at an age when others acquire this 
ability and later remain slow in repetitive timed color-naming [9]. Thus, both in acquired 
adult and developmental child "dyslexia" (less dramatic than "pure alexia"), slow color- 
naming may parallel slow, inefficient reading skill. 
Since slowing of, rather than total failure of, color-naming has been related to dyslexia, 
it seemed reasonable to question whether other visual-verbal tasks (naming pictured 
objects, letters, and numbers) might also reveal deficits under pressure of time, and, if so, 
what pattern of dissociation among visual-verbal categories might be seen. EAKIN and 
471 
472 MARTHA BRIDGE DENCKLA and RITA G. RUDEL 
DOUGLAS [I0] have a l ready demons t ra ted tha t dyslexic chi ldren were slow in naming o f 
repeti t ive visual i tems, a slowness which interested those invest igators in terms o f the 
process o f " a u t o m a t i z a t i o n " involved in the task (not the specific v i sua l -verba l aspect 
thereof) . DENCKLA and RUDEL [11] in an effort to differentiate the " v i s u a l - v e r b a l " f rom the 
" a u t o m a t i z a t i o n " d imension, s tudied rapid , repeti t ive naming o f numbers , letters, colors, 
and objects in no rma l chi ldren between the ages o f 5-11. The results indica ted tha t " au to - 
ma t i za t ion" of naming separa ted a long lines which did no t correlate with age o f acquisi t ion 
o f names or with richness o f mul t i sensory experience with the stimuli. Object names, the 
earl iest acquired, were the least well " a u t o m a t i z e d " whereas numbers and letters, the mos t 
recently acquired, were named fastest even by norma l chi ldren as young as 7. 
However , dyslexic chi ldren might be relat ively more impai red naming colors, numbers , 
and letters, i f deve lopmenta l dyslexia were indeed a specific difficulty with symbols ( "asym- 
bol ia" ) as descr ibed by CRITCHLEY [12]. In tha t case, dyslexics should be unimpai red , 
relative to no rma l children, in their speed o f object naming. 
N a m i n g speeds might reveal some distinctive r ank order o f difficulty among categories 
which would differentiate the dyslexic f rom no rma l children, poss ibly p rov id ing clues as 
to specific v i sua l -percep tua l or l inguist ic factors . By also testing non-dyslexic bra in- 
damaged chi ldren on the same tasks one might p rovide a neurologica l ly-based compar i son 
o f such specific factors to general ized slowing o f react ion time, often repor ted as a non- 
specific effect o f b ra in damage [13, 14]. 
M E T H O D 
Subjects 
1. Controls. Consisted of 120 children distributed equally among 4 age groups: group 1:7-7:11 yr, 
group 2:8-8:11 yr, group 3:9-9:11 and group 4:10-10:11 yr. There were 30 Ss/group, 15 male and 15 
female. These Ss were drawn from the middle achieving section of elementary schools in Fort Lee, New 
Jersey. The naming performance of these Ss and 60 additional younger Ss (age 5-6:11) has been previously 
described in a paper devoted to rapid "automatized" naming in normal children, by D~NCKLA and RtrOEL 
[11]. 
2. Experimental Ss. Consisted of 128 children ages 7-13 (100 males, 28 females) with learning disabilities: 
16 in group I (7-7:11 yr); 32 in group 2 (8-8:11); 25 in group 3 (9-9:11) and 55 in group 4 (ages 10-12:11). 
Age group 4 of the experimental Ss includes some older Ss than group 4 of the control sample. The experi- 
mental Ss were selected at two schools for special education or at the office of the senior author who is a 
consulting neurologist. The only selection bias determining inclusion of Ss for testing was the requirement 
that as least one WISC measure (Verbal or Performance) be 90 or above. 
Ss were tested on rapid automatized naming (R.A.N.) by research assistants who had no prior knowledge 
of Ss' I.Q., academic achievement, or neurological examination. I.Q. and oral reading test scores were 
obtained either from school records or by a qualified assistant other than the one doing the research (R.A.N. 
and other) testing. All neurological examinations were performed by the senior author either in the schools 
or in her office. 
Division of Ss into "dyslexic" and "non-dyslexic" groups was done post hoc by determining the difference 
between reading age and mental age (derived from WISC). The reading grade level utilized in this formula 
was based on a test of oral reading skill, therefore representing a score of "decoding" from written to 
spoken English and not a comprehension score. When the lag was 2 yr or more, the child was charac- 
terized as dyslexic, and only total non-readers were considered dyslexic among the 7-yr-olds. 
The dyslexic and non-dyslexic Ss differed only on Performance I.Q. which was higher for the dyslexic 
group (by Wilcoxon Rank Sum Tests, P[17]. Examples are articulatory substitutions 
characteristic of a younger child, absent or awkward performance of a motor skill expected at a certain age, 
or persistence of extinction to double simultaneous proximal-distal stimulation. 
RAPID "AUTOMATIZED" NAMING (R.A.N.) 473 
Neurological soft signs are subtle, borderline but "classical" in the sense that these are not on the normal 
developmental continuum of childhood. Examples are choreiform movements, tremors, reflex and tone 
asymmetries, postural and gait impairments (especially if asymmetrical), ocular apraxia, fixed strabismus, 
nystagmus, mild dysmetria or dysdiadochokinesis. 
Few instances of "hard" signs were found, but those which occurred, even alone, were b y definition 
"neurological". There were two types of soft signs: neurological or developmental. In each ease they were 
added up in terms of number of signs to reach a "1 -k", " 2 + " , or "3 q-", a semi-quantitative severity rating. 
There were further post hoc subdivisions of the cases with neurological signs in terms of exclusive or pre- 
ponderant lateralization. 
Table 1 summarizes the neurological categorization of the 128 learning disabled Ss. 
Table I. Relative frequencies of dyslexics (N = 52) vs non-dyslexics (N = 48) exhibiting developmental 
signs, neurological signs and no signst 
Devel. signs Neurol. signs No signs Total 
Dyslexic 33 15 4 52 
Non-dyslexic 14 32 2 48 
Total 47 47 6 100 
p2 = 13"793 (~ R, and R, R > L and bilateral signs for 
Ss shows a tendency (not statistically significant) for non-dyslexics over 7 yr of age to have left-sided signs 
more frequently than do dyslexic Ss. 
No significant differences in terms of "1 + " , "2 + " , or " 3 + " severity of signs, whether neurological or 
developmental, were found among either group of Ss. 
Materials 
Four charts, each consisting of 5 items repeated in random sequence so as to total 50 stimuli/chart, were 
used in this study: (1) colors (red, green, black, blue, yellow); (2) numerals (2, 6, 9, 4, 7); (3) use objects* 
(comb, key, watch, scissors, umbrella); and (4) high frequency lower-ease letters (p, o, d, a, s). These con- 
stitute 4 of the 9 charts described in DENCKLA and RUDEL [11], selected in order to test the different cate- 
gories of visual stimuli, traditionally sampled in aphasia and agnosia [18], colors, numbers, letters and 
objects. Such categories also represented maximally different speed of response, or "automatization", when 
named by normal children [11]. The selection of the lower ease letter chart was additionally motivated by 
interest in presenting the most frequently "reversed" letters ("p" and "d") without their mirror-image 
mates being available for "same-different" visual self¢orrection. 
Procedure 
The order of presentation of the 4 charts was fixed but regularly rotated to give every fifth S the same 
sequence. Instructions to the child were to name as quickly as possible each item on the chart (after untimed 
presentation of the basic 5 items on each chart and some minimal opportunity for questions and corrections), 
proceeding left to right, row by row. Timing with a 1/500 see stopwatch began with the S's first response 
after E said " G o " and terminated with the child's last spoken word. (For details of administration and 
scoring procedure, see [1 I].) 
R E S U L T S 
Since e r ro r s were e x t r e m e l y ra re b o t h a m o n g n o r m a l con t ro l s [11] a n d a m o n g the 128 Ss 
wi th l ea rn ing disabi l i t ies , analys is o f d a t a was res t r ic ted to d i f ferences in speed o f n a m i n g 
* Pictures taken from the Stanford-Binet Test, form L. 
474 MARTHA BRIDGE DENCKLA and RrrA G. RUDEL 
colors, numbers, letters, and objects. Data on naming times was subjected to a 3 factor 
analysis of variance with repeated measures on one factor [19]. The 3 factors were age (4 
levels), group (3 levels), and test (4 levels). Repeated measures were taken on the last factor. 
A posteriori comparisons utilizing Scheffe procedure [20] were performed on individual 
test, age, and group means. 
Differences between groups. The main effects of age, groups, and tests on naming time 
are all highly significant (F3/236 ---- 17.544, P 
0.05; Fla/708 = 0.694, P > 0'05). 
Table 2 gives F and P values for Scheff6 comparisons among individual experimental 
groups. (Because Scheff6 tests employ a very conservative procedure, the 0.10 level is 
generally accepted as indicating a significant difference.) The naming speed on all 4 tests 
for normals is better (faster) than for non-dyslexic learning disabled Ss, and non-dyslexic 
Ss, in turn, are significantly better (faster) than are dyslexic Ss. That these group differences 
are independent of age is indicated by the insignificant age × group interaction yielded by 
the ANOVA (see above). 
We subdivided the experimental groups in terms of degree of deviation from the normal 
mean for age on each of the 4 tests. Those Ss whose speed was within one standard deviation 
of the normative mean were called "average", those whose naming times were more than 
one standard deviation longer than the mean were "slow" and those whose naming times 
RAPID "AUTOMATIZED" NAMING (R.A.N.) 475 
Table 2. F values and significance levels for a posteriori comparisons among test means, group means, 
and age level means (Scheff6 tests) 
A. Comparisons among test means: values for F31~o8 
Colors vs Colors vs Colors vs Numbers vs Numbers vs Letters vs 
numbers letters objects letters objects objects 
501.36"*** 434-56**** 340.92**** 2.38 1669.13"*** 1545.28"*** 
B. Comparisons among group means: values for F2/236 
Normal vs Nondyslexic vs Normal vs 
nondyslexic dyslexic dyslexic 
1. Colors 12.74"** 5.29** 43.13"** 
2. Numbers 5.02* 93.05**** 37.13"*** 
3. Letters 14.74"**143.83"*** 43.88**** 
4. Objects 42-93**** 222.79**** 44.08**** 
C. Comparisons among age levels: values for F317os 
7 vs 8 7 vs 9 7 vs 10 8 vs 9 8 vs 10 9 vs 10--12 
1. Colors 5.52 21.57"** 36"86**** 6.48* 15"34"** 1.12 
2. Numbers 21.79"** 24.07*** 56.01"*** 0.15 7.63* 5.06 
3. Letters 28.26*** 29.75**** 74.99**** 0.09 10.86"* 8.19"* 
4. Objects 81.65"*** 98.13"*** 185"21"*** 1.45 19.25"** 8.69** 
* P 0.10). F igure 2 shows the same relat ive order o f difficulty o f rap id naming o f the four 
tests for normal , non-dyslexic, and dyslexic groups. 
Differences between age groups. The results o f Scheff6 compar i sons , presented in Table 2 
indicate tha t all 4 subtests d iscr iminate age groups which are at least 2 yr a p a r t (the older 
Ss a lways naming faster). N a m i n g speed on let ters and objects d iscr iminates 1-yr-adjacent 
age groups only o f the younges t and oldest Ss bu t no t within the middle range o f the 
MARa'rtA BRIDGE DENCKLA and RITA G. RUDEL 
TIME/¢,.c) [ ] Colors 
801- lib Numbers 
476 
NORMAL MONDYSLEXIC DYSLEXIC 
FIG. 2. Mean naming times of dyslexic, non-dyslexic learning-disabled and control groups 
on the four naming tests, showing order of relative difficulty. 
7-12-yr age span herein represented. Naming speed on numbers significantly separates 
7-yr-olds from all children 8 yr of age or older. (For characteristics of age differences on 
these naming tasks within normals alone, ages 5-11 yr, see [11].) 
DISCUSSION 
The results of this study demonstrate that tests of rapid automatized naming of colors, 
objects, numbers and letters differentiate the dyslexic learning disabled from the non- 
dyslexic learning disabled child and not just dyslexic from normal readers. On another level, 
these studies confirm the utility of deriving developmental neuropsychological tests from 
the clusters of associated findings on adults with acquired lesions, a possibility suggested 
in previous research [22-24]. The dramatic failures and dissociations of function docu- 
mented in adult cases are rarely seen in developmental cases sharing the same chief com- 
plaint and there is no anatomical data. 
A developmental psychologist would find it hard to conceive of "pure alexia" (without 
agraphia) and indeed one does not find this syndrome in childhood. Nevertheless, neuro- 
linguistic analysis of types of "pure alexia" illuminates analogous features of the "verbal 
alexia" associated with left occipital lesions [25]. In this type disturbed naming occurs, 
although without clinical aphasia. As HECAEN observes, "the only oral language disorder 
occasionally associated with this pure alexia appears to consist of a certain degree of 
verbal amnesia" or difficulty with verbal evocation [26, 27]. 
Adult alexics have been slow on one or all of these R.A.N. tests as almost the only 
symptom remaining along with labored letter-by-letter reading [7, 8]. 
The visual-verbal slowing of dyslexic Ss is not restricted to letters and numbers. Indeed, 
for dyslexics as well as for other children, letters and numbers are relatively easier to name 
quickly than are colors, and objects are hardest of all to name quickly. These findings are 
not compatible with CR1TCHLEY'S [12] explanation of dyslexia as a form of asymbolia, nor 
do they confirm the conclusions of SPRIN6 [28], whose dyslexic Ss were relatively more 
impaired naming digits than in naming colors or objects. Spring's Ss were required to 
rapidly name nine randomly sequenced digits as opposed to 25 different, non-repetitive 
object drawings [28] thereby minimizing "automatization". It is this which may account 
RAPID "AUTOMATI~r~" NAMING (R.A.N.) 477 
for the difference between results of the two studies. The main order of difficulty reported 
by SPRING [28] is the same as reported here: digits were named faster than colors, which, 
in turn, were named faster than objects by all Ss. Objects and letters were relatively more 
difficult for dyslexics to name rapidly, as compared to non-dyslexics and normals. This 
difference fits nicely with the fact that object and letter-naming are the most powerful 
predictors at the kindergarten level of which children are likely to fail in reading [29]. The 
psycholinguistic issues raised by the order of difficulty of rapid naming have been discussed 
elsewhere [11]. 
The question inevitably arises as to whether the results of the R.A.N. tests can be con- 
sidered but another demonstration of generally slowed reaction time attributable to brain 
damage [13, 14], but the highly significant level at which the test scores differentiated within 
the experimental groups as diagnostic correlates of dyslexia argues in favor of some 
specificity. The results are in fact, the reverse of what would be expected if one hypo- 
thesized general reaction time slowing due to brain damage. The non-dyslexic Ss, who 
performed significantly faster than the dyslexics, had more diffuse brain damage, albeit 
of the "subtle" or "soft" variety. The dyslexic Ss, who performed more slowly on the 
R.A.N. tests, had far fewer signs of brain damage but tended instead to have developmental 
or "below-age-expectation" signs. Mean performance I.Q., which is largely based on 
timed tests, was significantly higher for the dyslexic Ss, indicating that general slowing of 
perceptual-motor reaction time could not account for the slowing in repetitive naming. 
Two other studies drawing upon a similar learning disabled population have confirmed the 
dissociation of speed of naming [30] from other timed responses to visual symbols [31]. 
If then, R.A.N. taps something specifically relevant to dyslexia, what is the nature of that 
something? Is it visual-verbal association, clinically reflecting the adequacy of specific 
anatomical neurological connections or is it "automatization", a kind of rapid retrieval 
function (as put forth by EAKIN and DOUGLAS [10]. These are not entirely separable issues 
for the human brain, in which the visual system appears most ideally equipped for "auto- 
matized" linkages with verbal and motor output [32]. Longterm follow-up of left occipital- 
temporal lobectomy cases reveals the noncompensible loss of the direct visual route to 
"automatized" reading, the process of word-recognition consuming so much attention and 
energy that the flow of ideas is lost [7, 8]. These patients illustrate, in terms of reading (as 
do our childhood dyslexic patients) JAMES' [33] statement that "habit diminishes the con- 
scious attention with which our acts are performed . . . . The more of the details of our 
daily life we can hand over to the effortless custody of automatism, themore our higher 
powers of mind will be set free for their own proper work". 
Still to be explained is the source of the failure to "automatize" in dyslexic children. 
Attentional drift, poor speech-encoding, slow verbal retrieval, and subtle visual-processing 
delays must all be considered as possible causes of failure. In progress is a study of the 
correlations between tests which tap such different neuropsychological functions and the 
R.A.N. test. The diagnostic specificity of the R.A.N. with respect to dyslexia as a chief 
complaint may now lead to unraveling the finite but several mechanisms involved in 
reading failure. 
Acknowledgements--Grateful acknowledgements for help in testing to Ms. ELLEN ROSSKY, Ms. ]V'tEGAN 
MERY and Mrs. MARTHA SCHI~DT; for the statistical treatment of the data to Ms. MINNA PETROVICS; and 
for preparation of the manuscript to Ms. SUSAN HmSCH. This work was supported by the Robinson Oph- 
thalmic and Dyslexia Fund. Presbyterian Hospital in the City of New York (MARTHA B. DENCKLA, chief 
investigator) and by NIH-NINDS Grant No. 1 R01 NS 10575-01 (RrrA G. R~EL, principal investigator). 
478 MARTHA BRIDGE DENCKLA and RITA G. RUDEL 
R E F E R E N C E S 
1. OXBURY, J. M., OXBURY, S. M. and HUMPHREY, N. K. Varieties of colour anemia. Brain 92, 847-860, 
1969. 
2. GEscrlwmq), N. The varieties of naming errors. Cortex 3, 97-112, 1967. 
3. GEscrIWlt¢O, N. and FUSaLLO, M. Color-naming defects in association with alexia. A.M.A. Archs 
NeuroL 15, 137-146, 1966. 
4. H~CAEN, H. Clinical symptomatology in right and left hemispheric lesions. In Interhemispheric Relations 
and Cerebral Dominance. V. B. MOUNTCASTLE (Editor), Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, 215-244, 1962. 
5. HI~CAEN, H., GOLDBLUM, M. C., MASURE, M. C. and RAMmR, A. M. Une nouvelle observation d'agnosie 
d'objet. Deficit de l'association ou de la categorisation, sp6cifique de la modalit6 visuelle? Neuro- 
psychologic 12, 447-464, 1974. 
6. AJAX, E. T. Dyslexia without agraphia. A.M.A. Archs Neurol. 17, 645-652, 1967. 
7. DENCKLA, M. B. and BOWEN, F. P. Dyslexia after left occipito-temporal lobectomy: a case report. 
Cortex 9, 321-328, 1973. 
8. HOLTZMAN, R., GOLDENSOHN, E. and RUDEL, R. G. Paroxysmal alexia: a case study. (In preparation 
1975.) 
9. DENCKLA, M. B, Color-naming defects in dyslexic boys. Cortex 8, 164-176, 1972. 
10. EAK~, S. and DOUOLAS, V. I. "Automatization" and oral reading problems in children. J. Learning 
Disabilities 4, 31-38, 1971. 
11. DErqCKLA, M. B. and RUDEr, R. G. Rapid "automatized" naming of pictured objects, colors, letters, 
and numbers by normal children. Cortex 10, 186-202, 1974. 
12. CRirct-m~Y, M. The Dyslexic Child. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois, 1970. 
13. BLACr,.BtrRN, H. L. and BENTON, A. L. Simple and choice reaction time in cerebral disease. Confinia 
neurol. 15 (6), 327-338, •955. 
14. CZtrONER, B. and ROtrRKE, B. P. Simple reaction time in "brain-damaged" and normal children under 
regular and irregular preparatory interval conditions. Percept. Mot. Skills 31, 767-773, 1970. 
15. ScaArrq, R. J. Neurology of Childhood Learning Disorders. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, 1972. 
16. CLEraEN'rs, S. D. Minimal brain dysfunction in children. NINDB Monograph 3, Pub. Hlth. Ser. Publ. 
1415, 1966. 
17. KrNSBOtmNE, M. Minimal brain dysfunction as a neurodevelopmental lag. In Ann. New York Academy 
of Sciences. DE LA CRUZ, F. F., Fox, B. H. and ROBERTS, R. H. (Editors), 205, 268-273, 1973. 
18. GOODGLASS, H., KLEIN, B., CAREY, P. and JONES, K. Specific semantic word categories in aphasia. 
Cortex 2, 74-89, 1966. 
19. WINER, B. J. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1971. 
20. SCHEFFE, H. The Analysis of Variance. Wiley, New York, 1959. 
21. MONEY, J. Dyslexia: a postconference review. In Reading Disability: Progress and Research Needs in 
Dyslexia. MONEY, J. (Editor). Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, 1962. 
22. TEUBER, H.-L and RUDEL, R. G. Behavior after cerebral lesions in children and adults. Devel. Medicine 
and ChildNeurol. 4, 3-20, 1962. 
23. RUDEL, R. G., TEUBER, H.-L. and TWITCHELL, T. E. Levels of impairment of sensori-motor functions 
in children with early brain damage. Neuropsychologia 12, 95-108, 1974. 
24. RUDEL, R. G. and DENCKLA, M. B. Relation of forward and backward digit repetition to neurological 
impairment in children with learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia 12, 109-118, 1974. 
25. DUBOIS-CHARLIER, F. Approche neurolinguistique du probleme de l'alexie pure. J. Psychol. norm. path. 
68, 39-67, 1971. 
26. HECAEN, H. Aphasic, apractic and agnosic syndromes in right and left hemispheric lesions. In Handb. 
Clin. Neurol. V~KEN, P. S. and BRUYN, G. W. (Editors), 4, 291-311, 1969. 
27. HECAEN, H. Aspects des troubles de la lecture (alexies) au cours des 16sions c6r6brales en foyer. In 
Hommage e Andrd Martinet, num6ro sp6cial de Word, 23, 265-287, 1967. 
28. SPRING, C. Rehearsal, encoding speed and probed recall of dyslexic boys. J. of Educational Psychology. 
(In press, 1975). 
29. JANSKY, J. and DEHIRSCH, K. Preventing Reading Failure. Harper & Row, New York, 1973. 
30. DENCKLA, M. B. and RUDEL, R. G. Naming of pictured objects by dyslexic and other learning disabled 
children. Brain Lang. (In press, 1975). 
31. RUDEL, R. G. and DENCKLA, M. B. Repeated responses to randomly recurrent letters, numbers, and 
forms by dyslexic and non-dyslexic children. (In preparation, 1975). 
32. RUDEL, R. G., DENCKLA, M. B. and SPALTEN, E. Paired associate learning of Morse Code and Braille 
Letter names by dyslexic and normal children. Cortex (in press 1975). 
33. JAM~, W. Principles of Psychology. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, 1890. 
RAPID "AUTOMATIZED" NAMING (R.A.N.) 479 
R~sum~ : 
Les performances sur des tests r~clamant une discrimination 
rapide et r~p~titive des representations d'objets, de couleurs, de let- 
tres et de chiffres diff~rencient les enfants dyslexiques non seulement 
des contrSles normaux mais aussi des enfants non dyslexiques mais avec 
d'autres difficult@s d'apprentissage. Ii existe une correlation sp~cifi- 
que entre la dyslexie et un d~ficit de l'automatisation des r~ponses ver- 
bales aux stimulus visuels, non limit,S aux symboles. Ce d~ficit n'est 
pas seulement un ~l~ment d'un ralentissement g~n~ral du temps de r~action 
puisque les sujets dyslexiques ont un QI performance (WISC) moyen 
~lev~. Ces dyslexiques montraient d'ailleurs aussi moin de signes d'at- 
teinte neurologique que les non dyslexiques. 
Deutschsprachige Zusammenfassung: 
Die TestlSsungen zur Erfassung rascher wiederholter Benen- 
nung yon dargestellten Objekten, Farben, Buchstaben und 
Ziffern fielen bei dyslektischen Kindern deutlich schlech- 
ter aus als bei Normalpersonen und bei nicht-dyslektischen 
Kindern, die anderweitig behindert waren. Das Defizit in 
der Automatisierung verbaler Antworten auf optische Reize, 
die nicht auf Symbole beschr~nkt waren, korrelierte in 
spezifischer Weise zur Dyslexie. DaB dieser Mangel nicht 
Teil einer allgemeinen ~langsamung der Reaktionszeit war, 
zeigte sich in einem h8heren Leistungs-IQ der dyslektischen 
Kinder, die auBerdem auch weniger Zeichen neurologischer 
Beeintr~chtigung boten als nicht-dyslektische.