Vision anomalies and reading skill a meta-analysis of the literature

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 65, Issue 11, 1988, Pages 893-904

  Simons, Herbert D ^a   Gassler, Pauline A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Fusional vergences; Heterophoria; Meta analysis; Nearpoint of convergence; Poor readers; Reading performance; Refractive error; Stereopsis; Strabismus; Visual acuity

Indexed keywords

BINOCULAR CONVERGENCE; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HETEROPHORIA; HUMAN; READING; REFRACTION ERROR; REVIEW; STRABISMUS; VISUAL ACUITY;

DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMAN; META-ANALYSIS; READING; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; STRABISMUS; VISION DISORDERS;

EID: 0024162350     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00006324-198811000-00007     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Bedwell CH, Grant R, McKeown JR. Visual and ocular control anomalies in relation to reading difficulty. Br J Educ Psychol 1980;50:61-70.
2. Bettman JW, Stem El, Whitsell U, Gofman HF. Cerebral dominance in developmental dyslexia: Role of the ophthalmologist. Arch Ophthalmol 1967; 78:722-9.
3. Blika S. Ophthalmological findings in pupils of a primary school with particular reference to reading difficulties. Acta Ophthalmol 1982;60:927-34.
4. Dearborn WF, Anderson IW. Aniseikonia as related to disability in reading. J Exp Psychol 1938;23:559-77.
5. Drasdo N. The ophthalmic correlates of reading disability. Ophthal Opt 1971;11:948-55,998-1000.
6. Dunlop DB, Dunlop P, Fenelon B. Vision-laterality analysis in children with reading disability; the results of new techniques of examination. Cortex 1973; 9:227-36.
7. Dunlop P. The changing role of orthoptics in dyslexia. Br Orthopt J 1976;33:22-8.
8. Dunlop P, Banks EM. New binocular factors in reading disability. Aust Orthopt J 1973;13:7-11.
9. Eames TH. A comparison of the ocular characteristics of unselected and reading disability groups. J Educ Res 1932;25:211-5.
10. Eames TH. A frequency study of physical handicaps in reading disability and unselected groups. J Educ Res 1935;29:1-5.
11. Eames TH. Comparison of eye conditions among 1000 reading failures, 500 ophthalmic patients, and 150 unselected children. Am J Ophthalmol 1948; 31:713-7.
12. Evans JR, Efron M, Hodge C. Incidence of lateral phona among SLD children. Academic Therapy 1976: 11:431-3.
13. Fendrick P. Visual characteristics of poor readers. In: Contributions to Education 656. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1935.
14. Fletcher MC. The visual mechanisms in learning disorders. Am Orthopt J 1969;19:92-6.
15. Good GH. Relationship of fusion weakness to reading disability. J Exp Educ 1939;8:115-21.
16. Grosvenor T. Refractive state, intelligence test scores and academic ability. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom 1970;47:355-61.
17. Guber D, Boyd J, Fletcher MC. A quantitative test for retinal rivalry. Am Orthopt J 1969; 19:87-91.
18. Jackson T, Schye V. A comparison of vision with reading scores of ninth-grade pupils. Elem School J 1945;46:33-5.
19. Johnston PW. The relation of certain anomalies of vision and lateral dominance to reading disability. In: Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, vol 7, no 2, serial no 32. Washington, DC: National Research Council, 1942.
20. Norn MS, Rindziunski E, Skydsgaard H. Ophthalmologic and orthoptic examinations of dyslectics. Acta Ophthalmol 1969;47:147-60.
21. Park GE. Functional dyslexia (reading failures) vs normal reading. Comparative study of ocular functions. EENT Mon 1966;45:74-80.
22. Robinson HM. Visual efficiency and reading status in the elementary school. In: Robinson H, Smith H, eds. Clinical Studies in Reading. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968:49-65.
23. Rosenbloom AA. The relationship between aniseikonia and achievement in reading. In: Clinical Studies in Reading III (supplementary educational monograph no 97). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968:109-16.
24. Rutter M, Tizard J, Whitmore K. Education, Health, and Behavior. London: Longman, 1970.
25. Schonell FJ. Backwardness in the basic subjects. London: Oliver & Boyd, 1942.
26. Selzer CA. Lateral Dominance and Visual Fusion: Their Application to Difficulties in Reading, Writing, Spelling and Speech. (Harvard monographs in education, no 12). Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1933.
27. Slbiger F, Woolf D. Fixation disparity and reading achievement at the college level. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1968;45:734-42.
28. Spache GD, Tillman CE. A comparison of the visual profiles of retarded and non-retarded readers. J Develop Read 1962;5:101-9.
29. Stromberg EL. The relationship of lateral muscle balance and the ductions to reading speed. Am J Optom 1937;14:415-20.
30. Stomberg EL. The relationship of measures of visual acuity and ametropia to reading speed. J Appl Psychol 1938;22:70-8.
31. Swanson DE, Tiffin J. Betts' physiological approach to the analysis of reading disabilities as applied to ooSege level. J Educ Res 1936;29:433-48.
32. wsber GY. Visual disabilities: their identification and fetattonship with academic achievement. J Leam DisabU 1980;13:301-5.
33. Wison WK, Wold R. A report of vision-screening in the schools. Academic Therapy 1972;8:155-66.
34. Witty PA, Kopel D. Factors associated with the etiology of reading disability. J Educ Res 1936;29:449-59.
35. Allen MJ. The role of vision in learning disorders. J Learn Disabil 1977;10:411-5.
36. Betts EA. A physiological approach to the analysis of reading disabilities. Educ Res Bull 1934; 13:135-40,163-74.
37. Farris LP. Visual defects as factors influencing achievement in reading. J Exp Educ 1936;5:58-60.
38. Flax N. The contribution of visual problems to learning disability. J Am Optom Assoc 1970; 41:841-5.
39. Spache G. The role of visual defects in spelling and reading disabilities. Am J Orthopsychiatry 1940; 10:229-38.
40. Benton CD. Ophthalmologists recommend less emphasis on the eyes in learning disorders. J Leam Disabil 1970;3:536-8.
41. Goldberg HK. Vision, perception, and related facts in dyslexia. In: Keeney VT, Kenney AH, eds. Dyslexia: Diagnosis and Treatment of Reading Disorders. St. Louis; CV Mosby, 1968:90-109.
42. Stomberg EL. The relationship of measures of visual acuity and ametropia to reading speed. J Appl Psychol 1938;22:70-8.
43. Swanson DE, Tiffin JH Betts. physiological approach to the analysis of reading disabilities as applied to the college level. J Educ Res1936;29:433-8.
44. Witty PA, Kopel D. Causation and diagnosis of reading disability. J Psychol 1936;2:161-91.
45. Vision and learning disorders. In: Carter DB, ed. Interdisciplinary Approaches to Learning Disorders. Philadelphia: Chilton, 1970:122-2.
46. Dearborn WF, Leverett HM. Visual defects and reading. J Exp Educ 1945:13:111-24.
47. Rosen CL. Visual deficiencies and reading disability. J Reading 1965;9:57-61.
48. Schubert DG. Why the confusion in visual-reading relationships? Calif J Secondary Educ 1954; 29:16-7.
49. Suchoff IB. Research on the relationship between reading and vision–What does it mean? J Leam Disabil 1981;14:573-6.
50. Flax N. The eye and learning disabilities. J Leam Disabil 1973;6:328-33.
51. Flom BC. The optometrist's role in the reading field. In: Hirsch MJ, Wick RE, eds. Vision of Children. Philadelphia: Chilton, 1963:371-98.
52. Pierce JR. Is there a relationship between vision therapy and academic achievement? Rev Optom1977;114:48-63.
53. Simons HD, Grisham JD. Binocular anomalies and reading problems. J Am Optom Assoc 1987; 58:578-87.
54. Grisham JD, Simons HD. Refractive error and the reading process: a literature analysis. J Am Optom Assoc 1986;57:44-55.
55. Glass GV. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educ Researcher 1976;5:3-8.
56. Hedges LV, Olkin I. Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, 1985.
57. Hedges LV, Olkin I. Vote-counting methods in research synthesis. Psychol Bull 1980;88:359-69.
58. Light RJ, Smith PV. Accumulating evidence: procedures for resolving contradictions among different research studies. Harvard Educ Rev 1971; 41:429-71.
59. Wolf FM. Meta-Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1986.
60. Glass GV, McGaw B, Smith ML. Meta-Analysis in Social Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1981.
61. Light RJ, Pillemer DB. Summing Up: The Science of Reviewing Research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.
62. Slavin RE. Best-evidence synthesis: an alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educ Researcher 1986;15:5-11.
63. Cooper HM. The Integrative Research Review: A Systematic Approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1984.
64. Bryant FB, Wortman PM. Methodological issues in meta-analysis of quasi-experiments. In: Yeaton WH, Wortman PM, eds. Issues in Data Synthesis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1984:5-24.
65. Slavin RE. Meta-analysis in education: how has it been used? Educ Researcher 1984;13:6-27.
66. Cook TD, Leviton LC. Reviewing the literature: a comparison of traditional methods with metaanalysis. J Personality 1980;48:449-72.
67. Eysenck HJ. An exercise in mega-silliness. Am Psychol 1978:33:517.
68. Gallo PS. Meta-analysis: a mixed meta-phor. Am Psychol 1978;33:515-7.
69. Presby S. Overly broad categories obscure important differences between therapies. Am Psychol1978;33:514-5.
70. Strube MJ, Hartmann DP. Meta-analysis: techniques, applications, and functions. J Consult Clin Psychol 1983;51:14-27.
71. Holmes CT. Effect size estimation in meta-analysis. J Exp Educ 1984;52:106-9.
72. Hedges LV. Distribution theory lor Glass's estimator of effect size and related estimators. J Educ Stat 1981;6:107-28.
73. Hedges LV. Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychol Bull 1982-92:490-9.
74. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, rev ed. New York: Academic Press, 1977.
75. Blum HL, Peters HB, Bettman JW. The Orinda Study. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1968.