The external validity of age- versus IQ-discrepancy definitions of reading disability: lessons from a twin study.

Abstract

Recent research has raised the question of whether age- and IQ-discrepancy forms of reading disability (RD) are distinguishable in terms of either their underlying linguistic deficit or their response to treatment, thus threatening the external validity of the traditional distinction between specific reading retardation and reading backwardness. The present study pursued the external validity of this distinction in three domains: (a) genetic etiology, (b) sex ratio and clinical correlates, and (c) neuropsychological profiles. Each of these domains was explored in the RD (n = 640) and control (n = 436) twins participating in the Colorado Reading Project (514 males, 562 females, with an overall mean age of 12.42 years). Little evidence for external validity was found in terms of the clinical correlates of attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), immune disorders, or handedness. Most importantly, there was no evidence of differential genetic etiology of the two phenotypes in this sample, in that deficits in both phenotypes were similarly heritable (h2g = .40 and .46 for age and IQ phenotypes, respectively) and the genetic correlation between them was high (rG = .88 to .96). However, the genetic and neuropsychological profile analyses did suggest that age- and IQ-discrepancy definitions of RD may relate differentially to component reading processes, such as phonological awareness and orthographic coding.