Development of Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN)

Development of Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) in Simultaneous KannadaEnglish Biliterate Children Anand Siddaiah, Marita Saldanha, Shyamala K. Venkatesh, Nallur B. Ramachandra & Prakash Padakannaya Journal of Psycholinguistic Research ISSN 0090-6905 J Psycholinguist Res DOI 10.1007/s10936-014-9338-y

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media New York. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res DOI 10.1007/s10936-014-9338-y

Development of Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) in Simultaneous Kannada-English Biliterate Children Anand Siddaiah · Marita Saldanha · Shyamala K. Venkatesh · Nallur B. Ramachandra · Prakash Padakannaya

Received: 28 November 2013 / Accepted 31 October 2014 © Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Abstract RAN tests were administered to 600 typically developing children, 60 each from grade level one through grade ten (30 boys and 30 girls), who learn two distinct languages, English and Kannada simultaneously from the very first grade. The overall results were in accordance with similar previous studies in English and other European languages. The developmental trajectories were similar across the languages to a large extent; but the results also showed some differences across languages with respect to synchrony between the measures and the overall naming speed. Though some of the differences could be ascribed to the bilingual/biliterate culture and language use, there are enough scopes for future researches to examine these issues. Keywords Rapid automatized naming (RAN) · Naming speed · Kannada-English biliterates · Development of RAN

Introduction Reading, a highly valued skill by society, is considered as a cognitive process encompassing linguistic factors. Research with elementary school children has recognized five separate but interrelated linguistic factors, which play an important role in the acquisition of reading viz., phonological analysis, phonological synthesis, phonological coding, isolated naming and serial naming (Wagner et al. 1994). Children are expected to master these skills as they move from grade to grade and as a function of age. These abilities are characterized by different developmental rates and failure to acquire these skills may result in reading related problems. Many longitudinal, intervention, and cross-linguistic studies support this view that the above mentioned linguistic factors must work efficiently as reading abilities A. Siddaiah · M. Saldanha · P. Padakannaya (B) Department of Psychology, University of Mysore, Manasagangotri, Mysore 570006, India e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] S. K. Venkatesh · N. B. Ramachandra DOS in Zoology, Genomics Laboratory, University of Mysore, Mysore 570006, India

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res

develop (Georgiou et al. 2008; Ho and Lai 2000; Prakash et al. 1993; Wolf and Bowers 1999). Components like phonological analysis, phonological synthesis, phonological coding can be directly predicated by examining phonological skills whereas; the isolated and serial naming is better identified by rapid automatized naming tasks (RAN). RAN is the ability or skill to name sequence of visually presented familiar stimuli such as colors, objects, digits, and letters. It was Geshwind and Fusillo, who introduced the concept of RAN (only color naming) in 1965 when they examined alexia cases to find out what kind of brain damage led to their reading difficulty. They found that patients with alexia had a great difficulty in naming color even though they make out colors accurately (Geschwind and Fusillo 1966). Denckla and Rudel examined this hypothesis and found that the retrieval speed of color names rather than accuracy distinguished children with dyslexia from typically developing children and also other learning disabled children (Denckla and Rudel 1974). Later, Denckla in collaboration with Rudel (1974, 1976) developed and added three more additional tests of RAN-object, digit, and letter naming. In a typical RAN task, participants are asked to name the stimuli presented in a serial format as accurately and as quickly as possible (Denckla and Rudel 1974) though discrete format of presentation of stimuli is also used in some studies. Proponents in this area suggest that serial format of RAN assesses lexical retrieval that requires complex scanning; sequencing and processing of continuously presented materials and consider these as common components that naming and reading share. Many researchers have shown the slow performance on RAN tasks to be associated with reading accuracy (Neuhaus et al. 2001), poor reading performance (Frijters et al. 2011), slow reading rate (Bowers 1993, 1995; Bowers and Swanson 1991; Young and Bowers 1995), reading comprehension (Georgiou et al. 2010). A study by Frijters et al. (2011) showed that RAN-reading relationships are stronger in poor than in typical readers. Apart from these, a study by Stainthrop et al. (2013) has shown significant and unique contribution of RAN to spelling performance among children and those with low performance on RAN were significantly poorer spellers. A study by Poulsen et al. (2012) showed that RAN predicts early reading development and it can be measured before reading instruction begins. RAN is also often regarded as a very good predictor of present and future reading as it requires many of the same processes, from eye saccades to working memory to the connecting of orthographic and phonological representation (for review see Norton and Wolf 2012). Waber et al. (2000) pointed out that the poor performance in RAN could be viewed as an effective indicator or neurodevelopmental vulnerability to several learning or information processing problems. There is also evidence from a genetic study by Davis et al. (2001) that there is a stronger genetic covariance between reading skills and performance on RAN. Studies have also shown that RAN can distinguish children with varying degrees of learning and/or behavioral problems from their peers, and other varying degrees of reading disability in a consistent way. For example, a study by Carte et al. (1996) distinguished children with and without Attention Deficit and Hyperactive Disorder; Semrud-Clikeman et al. (2000) distinguished children with and without Hyperactivity; Tannock et al. (2000) distinguished children with and without language disorders. Furthermore, studies by Georgiou et al. (2008), Vaessen et al. (2010) and Tan et al. (2005) have shown that RAN is a strong predictor of reading development in many of the world’s languages and orthographies such as Arabic, Chinese, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Italian, Korean, Japanese, Norwegian, Persian, Polish, Portuguese, Spanish and Swedish, which is substantiated by Norton and Wolf (2012). Studies on development of RAN skills suggest that letter naming and digit naming develop faster as compared to color naming or object naming (Denckla and Rudel 1974; Meyer et

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res

al. 1998b; van den Bos et al. 2002; Wolf and Denckla 2005). Wolf et al. (1986) observed that differentiation between naming more alphanumeric symbols (letter and numbers) and non-alphanumeric symbols (objects and colors) occurs by the end of first grade level. Meyer et al. (1998a) and van den Bos et al. (2002) observed that maximum naming speed for digits reached around 8th grade level (around the age of 16 years), whereas study of Wolf and Denckla (2005) indicated floor effect for digit naming at the age of 14 years. Increase in the accuracy, apart from the naming speed, has also been reported as a function of age (Albuquerque and Simões 2010; Wolf and Denckla 2005). However, majority of the RAN developmental studies have been carried out in English. The objective of the present investigation was to study the development of RAN in a group of children in India who learn to read in Kannada (the official language of Karnataka state) and English simultaneously from first grade level and learn these languages throughout the primary and higher secondary schools (grade level ten). Kannada is one of the major Dravidian languages of South India. It is the state language of Karnataka, and is spoken by over 60 million people. Kannada has 49 basic letter symbols called akshara that are arranged according to the phonetic classes and manner of articulation (short—long; unaspirated—aspirated; unvoiced—voiced): vowels → diphthongs → consonants: velars → pre-palatals → retroflexes → dentals → bilabials → semivowels/sibilants/laterals. Akshara are alphasyllabary, which means that the symbol stands for orthographic syllable, which can further be visually analyzed into its constituent phonemes. There is almost one to one graphophonological equivalence expressed in syllable structure, regular signs of vowels being attached to the basic consonant forms. Each of the vowels, in addition to its syllabic (primary) form, has an intrasyllable (secondary) form which is used in writing a CV (other than shwa vowel) syllable and each syllable form can be analyzed into its consonant and vowel components. Further, it has hardly a few monosyllabic words, the most common words having two or three syllables. Thus by this feature of orthography, the phonemic length of Kannada words would generally be longer than corresponding English equivalent and hence would take longer time to name. A detailed analysis of Kannada orthography can be found in Prakash and Joshi (1989, 1995).

Method Participants Six hundred children, 60 children (30 boys and 30 girls) each from first grade level through tenth grade level studying in four English medium schools located within 2–3 km distance from each other in the city participated in the study. These schools admit the children to first grade after they attain 5 years and 10 months of age. As the state regulations are against failing students in any grade and their retention in the same class, generally no students repeat the grades. Their age ranged from 6 to 16 years. They were all taught Kannada and English. All the participants were using both Kannada and English in day-to-day activities with teachers, friends and parents. The class teachers were requested to provide their observations regarding the academic performance, socio-economic background, and presence of any severe behavioral/emotional problems in the students. All the participants were good or average in academics (as verified by their class test scores). They did not exhibit symptoms of any severe emotional, behavioral or physical disorders. Informed consent was obtained through the school authorities and the study had the approval from the University Ethical committee for human research.

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res

Materials and Procedure RAN test was originally designed and developed by Denckla and Rudel (1974). In this task, children are required to name high frequency familiar visual stimuli presented on the four different charts in a given order as quickly as possible. Each of the sub-test is made up of five high frequency stimuli repeated and arranged randomly 10 times in an array of 5 rows for a total of 50 stimulus items on A4 sheet. Stimulus sets were as follows. A list providing the Kannada equivalents is given in appendix 1 at the end. 1. 2. 3. 4.

Letter Naming (A, D, S, L, R) Digit Naming (2, 4, 6, 7, 9) Object Naming (Tree, Scissors, Sun, Bell, Cap) Color Naming (Red, Yellow, Green, Black, Blue)

All the 600 participants were administered RAN task individually in both English and Kannada languages in a quiet room provided in the school premise by the first author with assistance from the second author (both were well trained researchers). Before administering the test, the participants were briefed that we wanted to see how fast they could name familiar words or objects and were familiarized with the items of each task. Later, instructions were given in the following manner: “Now, I want you to name the objects/words/digits on the chart from the first row to the last row as fast as you can without making any mistakes and skipping items”. With the above instructions, ‘start’ signal was given and the responses were recorded using a Sony Voice Recorder. Order of presentation of tasks was mixed up. Scoring Responses recorded in the Sony Voice Recorder was transferred to computer or laptop and Software called Sound Forge was used to analyze the total time taken to complete the task and number of correct responses. Then both time and number of correct responses were noted down. Self corrections and errors were noted down, but the key dependent variable was the total time taken to name all the 50 items.

Results Means and standard deviations for RAN measures along with the F ratio for grade level differences are presented in Table 1. Results showed that there was a significant increase in the naming speed in all the RAN tasks across the grade levels in Kannada color naming (F = 68.40, p < .001), object naming (F = 99.13, p < .001), digit naming (F = 78.57, p < .001) and letter naming (F = 143.25, p < .001) and as well as in English color naming (F = 78.18, p < .001), object naming (F = 90.55, p < .001), digit naming (F = 212.51, p < .001) and letter naming (F = 156.69, p < .001). This was followed by Tukey’s test to compare means between different pairs of grades. As the total number of post hoc comparisons were too large (nearly 400 comparisons for the four RAN measures on ten grade levels in two languages), only the salient results are mentioned in the text. Further, a 2 (English and Kannada languages) × 10 (grades) factorial ANOVA was performed to study the main effects of language and grade level and their interaction if any (see Table 2). The ANOVA results (see Table 2) revealed that the main effects of language (within subject factor) color naming (F = 436.49, p < .001), object naming (F = 207.31, p < .001), digit naming (F = 513.54, p < .001) and letter naming (F = 442.76, p < .001) and grade level

123

61.27

(17.76)

M

(35.61)

(S D)

76.05

M

(27.59)

(S D)

97.62

M

(47.89)

(S D)

120.27

M

(13.96)

(S D)

47.37

M

(11.68)

(S D)

52.23

M

(S D)

(20.03)

E English, K Kannada

Letter (K)

Digit (K)

Object (K)

Color (K)

Letter (E)

Digit (E)

76.32

M

(S D)

(22.77)

Object (E)

76.05

M

(S D)

Color (E)

1

Grades

RAN measures

(9.66)

47.48

(15.05)

56.45

(14.85)

69.43

(26.69)

82.48

(5.31)

34

(5.62)

37.13

(14.18)

64.57

(14.38)

61.68

2

(5.75)

40.38

(6.05)

47.12

(8.71)

62.77

(13.61)

71.25

(5.65)

34.22

(6.17)

36.18

(12.76)

56.72

(17.96)

57.09

3

(6.97)

39.42

(4.99)

45.02

(6.06)

61.03

(13.54)

68.73

(5.66)

30.07

(5.63)

33.02

(13.25)

52.53

(13.17)

52.08

4

(7.00)

36.37

(7.57)

42.87

(8.65)

55.23

(10.07)

62.83

(5.28)

27.37

(5.01)

27.65

(7.87)

47.35

(8.03)

48.33

5

(7.09)

27.58

(7.35)

32.22

(8.83)

51.05

(14.02)

59.35

(4.26)

21.48

(4.97)

22.62

(7.97)

42.08

(6.28)

39.63

6

(4.73)

24.03

(6.36)

28.98

(9.17)

47.48

(12.81)

52.27

(4.05)

20.73

(4.14)

21.55

(7.22)

40.52

(8.56)

38.00

7

Table 1 Descriptive statistics-mean (in seconds) and standard deviation on all four tasks of RAN in English and Kannada

(4.74)

24.63

(5.47)

31.15

(9.98)

48.28

(8.88)

49.83

(2.73)

17.82

(2.37)

19.38

(5.19)

37.22

(6.26)

35.83

8

(3.75)

24.45

(5.75)

31.68

(6.85)

48.08

(7.89)

51.07

(2.09)

17.33

(1.72)

19.12

(5.38)

37.08

(5.89)

35.63

9

(4.08)

22.37

(6.04)

25.75

(8.02)

43.57

(9.79)

45.92

(2.04)

17.73

(3.94)

19.72

(5.41)

35.33

(5.88)

33.93

10

143.25

78.57

99.13

68.40

156.69

212.51

90.55

78.18

F

.001

.001

.001

.001

.001

.001

.001

.001

Sig.

Author's personal copy

J Psycholinguist Res

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res Table 2 Analysis of variance results for RAN task Task

Source

df

F

p

Color

Language (A)

1

436.49

.001

Grade (B)

9

114.14

.001

Language × Grade (AB)

9

10.98

.001

Language (A)

1

207.31

.001

Grade (B)

9

161.94

.001

Language × Grade (AB)

9

6.84

.001

Language (A)

1

513.54

.001

Grade (B)

9

168.84

.001

Language × Grade (AB)

9

9.62

.001

Language (A)

1

442.76

.001

Grade (B)

9

248.96

.001

Language × Grade (AB)

9

8.26

.001

Object

Digit

Letter

(between subjects factor), color naming (F = 114.14, p < .001), object naming (F = 161.94, p < .001), digit naming (F = 168.84, p < .001) and letter naming (F = 248.96, p < .001) were significant for all the RAN measures. The interaction effect was also significant for all the measures - color naming (F = 10.98, p < .001), object naming (F = 6.84, p < .001), digit naming (F = 9.62, p < .001) and letter naming (F = 8.26, p < .001)—revealing that the effect of RAN measures in Kannada and English was not uniform across the grade levels though the same students were tested on naming colors, objects, digits, and letters in English and Kannada. However, the overall means suggested that the naming speed increased over the grade levels and the speed was significantly faster in English in general. The results of univariate ANOVA (see Table 1) on grade level performances revealed significant increase in naming speed in all the RAN tasks across the grade levels in both in Kannada and English (also see Figs. 1, 2). Tukey’s test of multiple comparisons revealed that the rate of increment, however, was not uniform across all successive grade levels. For English, there were significant increments in color naming speed from first grade level through third grade level and from grade 5 through grade 6; but no significant difference from grade 3 through grade 5 and grade 7 through grade 10. On object naming significant increments were found only up to third grade level and between grade levels 4 and 5. For digit naming too the significant increments in naming speed were observed up to third grade level and from grade 4 to grade 6. Similarly, there were significant increments up to grade 4 and between grade 5 and grade 6 in letter naming task. Tueky’s test revealed a similar pattern of performance on RAN tasks in Kannada. There were significant increments in naming speed in all the four tasks from the first grade level through grade 4 level. Though there were gradual increments in naming speed over the grades, the difference was not significant between successive grade levels.

Discussion Main objective of this study was to examine how RAN of colors, objects, digits, and letters develops in a group of typically developing children who are exposed to literacy in English and Kannada from grade one through grade ten. The results showed that naming speed on all

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res

Fig. 1 Graphical representation showing mean time in seconds against grades on four tasks of RAN

Fig. 2 Graphical representation showing mean time in seconds against grades on four tasks of RAN

four tasks in general increased as a function of age and grade in both English and Kannada in line with such earlier studies (Albuquerque and Simões 2010; Denckla and Rudel 1974; Kail et al. 1999; van den Bos et al. 2002; Wiig et al. 2000; Wolf and Denckla 2005). Further, the results of RAN in English were in accordance with the view that large increments in speed are made by the end of second grade level (Wolf et al. 1986). In Kannada, however, large increments were observed in naming speed up to grade level three. Majority of the previous studies suggest that ceiling level in naming speed is reached at around grade level eight (Denckla and Rudel 1974; Meyer et al. 1998a, b; van den Bos et al. 2002; Wolf and Denckla 2005). It was true for digit and letter naming tasks in English; otherwise, the naming speed seemed to continue to develop even beyond grade 10 level albeit being very gradual. The average naming speed in Kannada appeared to improve even between grade levels nine and ten suggesting that the naming speed continues to grow even after high school level for Kannada children. One of the reasons for this could be bilingual nature of the children. As the participants of the present study, like many other children India, were studying in English medium schools, they would tend to be code mixing in a single direction (mixing English terms or words in Kannada sentences) and the frequency of Kannada terms for colors,

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res

common objects, and digits may in fact reduce as they move up in grade levels. As regards to letter naming, the large set of Kannada symbols (see Karanth 2002; Nag 2007; Padakannaya and Ramachandra 2011; Padakannaya et al. 2002) could be a major reason why we did not see flattening of the curve even at the tenth grade level. Naming speed for colors and objects was slower than for digits and letters in both the languages, which is in agreement with similar studies (Denckla and Rudel 1974; van den Bos et al. 2002; Wolf and Denckla 2005). Nearly overlapping performance with respect to color naming and object naming on the one hand and between digit naming and letter naming on the other in English is similar to the observation reported in other studies (Meyer et al. 1998a) due to their high frequency and automatic accessibility (Johnson et al. 1996). However, no such overlaps were observed for Kannada. The average naming speed for color was least followed by objects, digits, and letters in that order. Thus, the effect of literacy practice (dealing with numbers and letters) was obvious even in Kannada; but the values differed for digits and letters as usage frequency of Kannada letters was definitely much higher than digit names in Kannada among the biliterate participants of the study. The digits used in English and Kannada naming were the same (Kannada digit forms are rarely used in school and therefore we chose to use the same digits but participants named them either in English or in Kannada as instructed by the test giver), which could be read either in Kannada or English but Kannada letters were unique and could not be read using English names. Naming speed, in general, was significantly faster in English than corresponding values for Kannada (see Table 2). Certain linguistic and orthographic properties such as larger grain size of Kannada could be the reasons. However, a study in which the pause time (PT) and articulation time (AT) components in RAN tasks in Kannada were compared with component measures in English, found the differences on PT, AT, as well as total time to be significant (Siddaiah et al. under review). Thus the difference between the languages does not seem to be due to the longer articulation time that Kannada words may take. Further studies are required to look into why these measures vary across languages of different types of orthographies.

Conclusion The present study employed all four original tasks of RAN developed by Denckla and Rudel (1974) and studied their development from grade one level through grade 10 among students who were exposed to literacy in two distinct languages simultaneously. The overall results were in accordance with similar previous studies in English and other European languages. The developmental trajectories were similar across the languages to a large extent; but the results also showed some differences across languages with respect to synchrony between the measures and the overall naming speed. Though some of the differences could be ascribed to the bilingual/biliterate culture and language use, there are enough scopes for future researches to examine these issues. The data provided in the paper could serve as a norm reference for future studies in similar bilingual setups in India (e.g., Veerappa et al. 2013; Venkatesh et al. 2013). Acknowledgments We thank Department of Science and Technology, Cognitive Science Initiative, Government of India, research Grant SR/CSI/14/2008 (09/01/2009) for partial support.

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res

Appendix

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res

References Albuquerque, C. P., & Simões, M. R. (2010). Rapid naming tests: Developmental course and relations with neuropsychological measures. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13(1), 88–100. Bowers, P. G. (1993). Text reading and rereading: Predictors of fluency beyond word recognition. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25, 133–153. Bowers, P. G. (1995). Tracing symbol naming speed’s unique contributions to reading disability over time. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 7, 189–216. Bowers, P. G., & Swanson, L. B. (1991). Naming speed deficits in reading disability: Multiple measures of a singular process. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 51, 195–219. Carte, E. T., Nigg, J. T., & Hinshaw, S. P. (1996). Neuropsychological functioning, motor speed, and language processing in boys with and without ADHD. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 24, 481–498. Davis, C. J., Gayan, J., Knopik, S., Smith, S. D., Cardon, L. R., Pennington, B. F., et al. (2001). Etiology of reading difficulties and rapid naming: The Colorado twin study of reading disability. Behavior Genetics, 31, 625–635. Denckla, M. B., & Rudel, R. G. (1974). Rapid “Automatized” Naming of pictured objects, colors, letters, and numbers by normal children. Cortex, 10, 186–202. Frijters, J. C., Lovett, M. W., Steinbach, K. A., Wolf, M., Sevcik, R. A., & Morris, R. D. (2011). Neurocognitive predictors of reading outcomes for children with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 150–66. Georgiou, G., Manolitsis, G., Nurmi, J. E., & Parrila, R. (2010). Does task-focused versus task-avoidance behavior matter for literacy development in an orthographically consistent language? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 1–10. Georgiou, G., Parrila, R., & Liao, Ch H. (2008). Rapid naming speed and reading across languages that vary in orthographic consistency. R eading and Writing: An Inter disciplinary Journal, 21, 885–903. Geschwind, N., & Fusillo, M. (1966). Color-naming deficits in association with Alexia. Archives of Neurology, 15, 137–146. Ho, C. S. H., & Lai, D. N.-C. (2000). Naming speed deficits and phonological memory deficits in Chinese developmental dyslexia. Learning and Individual Differences, 11, 173–186. Johnson, C. J., Paivio, A., & Clark, J. M. (1996). Cognitive components of picture naming. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 113–139. Kail, R., Hall, L. K., & Caskey, B. J. (1999). Processing speed, exposure to print, and naming speed. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20, 303–314. Karanth, P. (2002). Reading into reading research through nonalphabetic lenses: Evidence from the Indian Languages. Topics in Language Disorders, 22(5), 20–31. Korkman, M., Barron-Linnankoski, S., & Lahti-Nuuttila, P. (1999). Effects of age and duration of reading instruction on the development of phonological awareness, rapid naming, and verbal memory span. Developmental Neuropsychology, 16, 415–431. Meyer, M. S., Wood, F. B., Hart, L. A., & Felton, R. H. (1998a). Longitudinal course of rapid naming in disabled and non disabled readers. Annals of Dyslexia, 48, 91–114. Meyer, M. S., Wood, F. B., Hart, L. A., & Felton, R. H. (1998b). Selective predictive value of rapid automatized naming in poor readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 106–117. Nag, S. (2007). Early reading in Kannada: The pace of acquisition of orthographic knowledge and phonemic awareness. Journal of Research in Reading, 30, 1–17. Neuhaus, G., Foorman, B., Francis, D., & Carlson, C. (2001). Measures of information processing in rapid automatised naming (RAN) and their relationship to reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 78, 359–373. Norton, E., & Wolf, M. (2012). Rapid automatized naming (RAN) and reading fluency: Implications for understanding and treatment of reading disabilities. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 427–452. Padakannaya, P., & Ramachandra, N. B. (2011). Reading Akshara: Indian alphasyllabary. In P. McCardle, J. R. Lee, O. Tzeng, & B. Miller (Eds.), Dyslexia across languages: Orthography and the brain-gene-behavior link (pp. 76–95). Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. Padakannaya, P., Rekha, D., Vaid, J., & Joshi, M. (2002). Simultaneous acquisition of Literacy skills in English and Kannada: A longitudinal study. Singapore: International Association of Applied Linguistics (AILA). Poulsen, M., Juud, H., & Elbro, C. (2012). Multiple mediation analysis of the relationship between rapid naming and reading. Journal of Research in Reading. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01547. Prakash, P., & Joshi, R. M. (1989). Language representation and reading in Kannada: a South Indian language. In P. G. Aaron & Malatesha Joshi (Eds.), Reading and writing disorders in different orthographic systems (pp. 223–230). London: Kluwer.

123

Author's personal copy J Psycholinguist Res Prakash, P., & Joshi, R. M. (1995). Orthography and reading in Kannada: A dravidian language. In I. Taylor & D. Olson (Eds.), scripts and reading: reading and learning to read world’s scripts (pp. 95–108). London: Kluwer. Prakash, P., Rekha, D., Nigam, R., & Karanth, P. (1993). Phonological awareness, orthography and literacy. In R. Scholes & B. Willis (Eds.), Literacy: Linguistic and cognitive perspectives (pp. 55–70). London: LEA Publishers (U.S.A.). Semrud-Clikeman, M., Steingard, R. J., Filipek, P., Biederman, J., Bekken, K., & Renshaw, P. F. (2000). Using MRI to examine brain-behavior relationships in males with attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 477–484. Stainthrop, P., Powell, D., & Stuart, M. (2013). The relationship between rapid naming and word spelling in English. Journal of Research in Reading, 36(4), 371–388. Tan, L. H., Spinks, J. A., Eden, G. F., Perfetti, C. A., & Siok, W. T. (2005). Reading depends on writing, in Chinese. Proceedings of National Science Academy, 102, 8781–85. Tannock, R., Martinussen, R., & Frijters, J. (2000). Naming speed performance and stimulant effects indicate effortful, semantic processing deficits in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 3, 237–252. Vaessen, A., Bertrand, D., Tóth, D., Csépe, V., & Faísca, L. (2010). Cognitive development of fluent word reading does not qualitatively differ between transparent and opaque orthographies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 827–842. van den Bos, K. P., Zijlstra, B. J. H., & Spelberg, B. J. H. (2002). Life-span data on continuous-naming speeds of numbers, letters, colors, and pictured objects, and word-reading speed. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 25–49. Veerappa, A. M., Saldanha, M., Padakannaya, P., & Ramachandra, N. B. (2013). Family-based genome-wide copy number scan identifies five new genes of dyslexia involved in dendritic spinal plasticity. Journal of Human Genetics, 58, 539–547. Venkatesh, S. K., Siddaiah, A., Padakannaya, P., & Ramachandra, N. B. (2013). Analysis of genetic variants of dyslexia candidate genes KIAA0319 and DCDC2 in Indian population. Journal of Human Genetics, 58, 531–538. Waber, D. P., Wolf, P. H., Forbes, P. H., & Weiler, M. D. (2000). Rapid automatized naming in children referred for evaluation of heterogeneous learning problems: How specific are naming speed deficits to reading disability? Child Neuropsychology, 6, 251–261. Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). Development of reading related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bi-directional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73–87. Wiig, E. H., Zureich, P., & Chan, H. H. (2000). A clinical rationale for assessing rapid, automatic naming in children with language disorders. Journal of Learning Disability, 33, 359–374. Wolf, M., Bally, H., & Morris, R. (1986). Automaticity, retrieval processes, and reading: A longitudinal study of average and impaired readers. Child Development, 57, 988–1000. Wolf, M., & Bowers, P. (1999). The double deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexia. Journal of Education Psychology, 91(3), 415–438. Wolf, M., & Denckla, M. B. (2005). The rapid automatized naming and rapid alternating stimulus tests. Examiner’s manual. Austin: Pro-Ed. Young, A., & Bowers, P. G. (1995). Individual difference and text difficulty determinants of reading fluency and expressiveness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60, 428–454.

123