In the past children and adolescents with emotional problems and/or documented evidence of brain damage have often been systematically omitted from samples used for research exploring the elusive topic of learning disabilities. Previous conceptualizations of LD and attempts to define the same may have been premature in forming these exclusionary criteria. The purpose of this study was to employ psycho-educational, neuropsychological and socio-behavioral (Conners Rating Scale) variables in determining if definable subtypes exist within a diverse population of LD and overtly brain-damaged subjects.The 95 subjects selected had been referred for neuropsychological assessment at a large Midwestern medical center. The mean age of the sample was 10.6 yrs.; mean FSIQ = 102. Medically confirmed brain damage was documented for 45% of the sample.Cluster analysis which included behavioral data revealed 4 interpretable clusters. The largest segment (51%) of learners functioned within normal limits on all measures but demonstrated relatively stronger nonverbal than verbal skills. The second group (20%) was within normal limits on all psycho-educational and behavioral measures but demonstrated marked sensory deficits. A third and much smaller group (9%) was distinguished by its younger average age, high percentage of documented brain damage (75%), and clinically elevated levels of inattentiveness. The fourth group (20%) demonstrated both the poorest VIQ and achievement scores as well as significant problems with hyperactivity, inattentiveness, and conduct disorder.For comparison a second cluster analysis based on only psycho-educational and neuropsychological variables was calculated and yielded 2 interpretable clusters. The first subtype was the younger of the 2 groups and demonstrated stronger language skills. The second subtype, the older of the two, showed stronger nonverbal skills. Neither subgroup demonstrated clinically elevated behavioral concerns. The inclusion of behavioral variables within the cluster analysis would thus seem to be an important component in subtyping of subjects with learning difficulties.In neither of the cluster solutions (including or excluding behavior) was a cluster formed consisting exclusively of either BD or LD subjects. Percentages of BD in the analysis which included behavior ranged from 36% of the subjects in Group 2 to 75% of the subjects in Group 3. These findings are supportive of those of Arffa et al. (1989) and contribute to the notion that parallels may exist in cerebral function and/or structure between the LD and BD classifications. / Department of Educational Psychology
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/181993 |
| Date | January 1990 |
| Creators | Williams, Dorothy L. |
| Contributors | Gridley, Betty E. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | v, 107 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds