Current methods of diagnosis for developmental dyslexia rely on family history report and cognitive and language behavioral testing. However, relying on these measures alone to predict dyslexia in at-risk children can result in low sensitivity and specificity, with dyslexic individuals either being missed or over-identified. Prediction accuracy could be increased by considering structural differences in the dyslexic brain along with behavioral measures. Reduplication of Heschl’s gyrus, where the primary auditory cortex resides, has been suggested as a risk factor for developing dyslexia. The current investigation explored if differences in interhemispheric duplication patterns and gray matter volume of Heschl’s gyrus could distinguish between dyslexic and neurotypical (control) brains. A detailed labeling protocol based on macroanatomical landmarks and explicitly defined reduplication morphotypes: single Heschl’s gyrus (SH), common stem duplication (CSD), complete posterior duplication (CPD), and multiple duplication (MD) was developed. Overall, there was no significant difference in the incidence of morphotypes between control and dyslexic brains. Duplication of Heschl’s gyrus was a common occurrence in both groups. However, results suggest that the MD morphotype may occur more often in dyslexic brains. Gray matter volume of anterior Heschl’s gyrus was larger in the left hemisphere in both groups but tended to be larger overall in dyslexic brain. Results of this investigation confirmed the presence of high morphological variability between and within brains and suggest that reduplications in Heschl’s gyrus alone are not enough to designate between neurotypical and dyslexic brains. It is likely that developmental dyslexia has heterogeneous origins, and it is possible that increased gyrification combined with other structural differences is one possible origin.

The purpose of this clinical research project was to use an interaction analysis system to compare the behaviors of clinicians and their clients with two types of communicative disorders and to determine how the clinicians utilized their clinical time. More specifically, this study employed the Conover Analysis System (Conover, 1974) and compared the client-clinician behaviors in the Portland State University Urban Language Clinic and Stuttering Clinic. The data which were gathered provided a baseline of the client-clinician behaviors in the two clinical settings.

The purpose of this study was to assess the amount of time spent by the clinician and client in verbalization and to make an analysis of the kind of verbalizations employed by the clinician in speech therapy sessions. Experience was given consideration as a possible variable in the study. Nine clinicians in a public school setting were used as subjects. They were divided equally into the three following categories : (a) clinicians having less than one year’s experience. (b) clinicians having 1-3 years experience. (c) clinicians having more than 3 years experience. Six therapy sessions of each clinician were tape-recorded and analyzed. It was found that experience was not a significant variable in either of the two categories under study. It was shown, however, that there was a negative correlation between the amount of verbalization of clinician and client. Eight out of nine clinicians talked more than the clients. A high correlation was noted between the amount of verbalization used by the clinicians and their use of positive and descriptive utterances. The amount of client verbalization seemed to bear little or no relationship to the kinds of utterances used by the clinician. Analysis of positive and descriptive utterances showed a high positive correlation, while most of the other categories showed evidence of a moderate negative relationship. Further study was suggested for the following: (a) a survey of the different techniques used by clinicians (b) the effect of different techniques on the amount of verbalization used by both clinician and client (c) the modification of the content of the client’s responses by the kinds of utterances used by the clinician The present study may be of most value in indicating a possible means of constructing a profile of the kinds of utterances used by each clinician.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.