Poster #45 - Cognitive Resilience in Dyslexia: In Search of Protective Factors That Influence Reading

• In Event: 2-110 - Poster Session 07
  In Poster Session: PS 07 Section - Developmental Disabilities

Integrative Statement

Intro: Dyslexia research has typically focused on cognitive risks associated with elevated rates of the disorder with less emphasis on protective factors that buffer or deter risk. The goal of this study was to apply analytic methods for examining resilience to the field of dyslexia research, drawing from well-established frameworks in the developmental psychopathology literature. The main study aim was to examine cognitive protective factors that may mitigate the effects of the best validated risk factor for dyslexia, impairments in phonological awareness (PA) that are associated with worse reading outcomes. We hypothesized that cognitive protective factors, such as higher levels of vocabulary, verbal working memory (VWM), rapid automatized naming (RAN), and processing speed (PS), would moderate the association between PA impairments and reading.

Methods: 1,466 children and adolescents, ages 8-16, were drawn from the Colorado Learning Disabilities Research Center (CLDRC), a population-based sample of twins recruited for reading problems and/or ADHD, and typically-developing controls (49% female; 85% Caucasian). Twins were administered a large battery of cognitive and academic instruments, including multiple measures of PA, single-word reading, vocabulary, VWM, RAN, and PS. Analyses used composite scores on all variables that adjusted for child age and sex. Multiple regression models examined each cognitive protective factor (Vocab, RAN, VWM, and PS): Reading = Cognitive factor + PA + (Cognitive Factor x PA), and Bonferroni corrections were applied (p = .006).

Results: All cognitive factors (Vocabulary, RAN, VWM, and PS) showed main effects on reading (all p’s <.006), replicating previous research. Only Vocabulary (Vocabulary x PA) and PS (PS x PA) interactions were found to be significant (p <.006). According to simple slope analyses, however, the interactions did not reflect classic protective effects. Rather, than showing that Vocabulary and PS buffer associations between lower PA and reading ability, they showed that both Vocabulary and PS boost reading abilities particularly when PA is higher (Figure 1).

Discussion: Results replicate main effect associations of Vocabulary, RAN, VWM, and PS with reading. While dyslexia research usually focuses on the lower end of reading ability, the linear nature of these findings suggests that these same factors act as cognitive promotive factors for reading at the higher end of functioning. Regarding protective factors, only Vocabulary and PS showed significant interactions with PA, but their form was to enhance ability, rather than protect against risk. The observation that Vocabulary and PS became increasingly important for reading in the absence of PA risk is in line with the “Matthew Effect” which describes the observation that the “the rich get richer” (Stanovich, 1986). According to this effect, cognitive strengths boost or enhance the development of additional cognitive strengths in children, which is a pattern that is incompatible with the conceptualization of protective factors. In sum, findings indicate that these specific cognitive factors may not serve protective functions against cognitive risk in this sample. Researchers should continue to search for protective factors at other levels of analysis (e.g. biological, environmental, and emotional levels).

Authors

• Rebecca Slomowitz, University of Denver
  Presenting Author

• Angela J. Narayan, University of Denver
  Non-Presenting Author

• Lauren McGrath, University of Denver
  Non-Presenting Author