Cited by 343Reading and Literacy DevelopmentDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comorbidity Between Reading Disability and Math Disability: Concurrent Psychopathology, Functional Impairment, and Neuropsychological Functioning

Open access

Abstract

Reading disability (RD) and math disability (MD) frequently co-occur, but the etiology of this comorbidity is not well understood. Groups with RD only (N = 241), MD only (N = 183), and RD + MD (N = 188) and a control group with neither disorder (N = 411) completed a battery of measures of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology, social and academic functioning, and 10 neuropsychological processes. Groups with RD only, MD only, and RD + MD were significantly impaired versus the control group on nearly all measures, and the group with RD + MD was more impaired than the groups with MD and RD alone on measures of internalizing psychopathology, academic functioning, and 7 of 10 neuropsychological constructs. Multiple regression analyses of the neuropsychological measures indicated that deficits in reading and math were associated with shared weaknesses in working memory, processing speed, and verbal comprehension. In contrast, reading difficulties were uniquely associated with weaknesses in phoneme awareness and naming speed, and math deficits were uniquely associated with weaknesses in set shifting. These results support multiple-deficit neuropsychological models of RD and MD and suggest that RD and MD are distinct but related disorders that co-occur because of shared neuropsychological weaknesses in working memory, processing speed, and verbal comprehension.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022219413477476

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 86 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Achenbach T. M., 2001, Manual for ASEBA school-age forms and profiles
  2. Dunn L. M., 1970, Examiner’s manual: Peabody Individual Achievement Test
  3. Jastak S., 1984, Wide Range Achievement Test, Revised: Administration manual
  4. Setterberg S., 1992, Parent and interviewer version of the Children’s Global Assessment Scale
  5. Wechsler D., 1991, Manual for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Third Edition
  6. Wilkinson G. S., 1993, Examiner’s manual: Wide Range Achievement Test–3

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 343

Metadata

Authors
Willcutt, E. G., Petrill, S. A., Wu, S., Boada, R., DeFries, J. C., Olson, R. K., & Pennington, B. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
  • University of Denver (US)
Venue
Journal of Learning Disabilities
Published
2013-02-28
Volume
46
Issue
6
Pages
500-516
ISSN
  • 0022-2194 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4780
OpenAlex
W2114081569
Cited by
343
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5
FWCI
29.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Learning Disabilities (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH 70037, R01MH070037)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC005190, R01 DC 05190)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD068728, R01HD047264, R01 HD 59215, P50-HD27802, R01 HD 68728, R01 HD 69728, R01 HD 47264, R01HD059215, R01HD38526, R24HD075460, R01HD038526, R24 HD 75460, P50HD027802)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Keywords
reading disorders, math disabilities, dyslexia, dyscalculia, comorbidities, working memory, processing speed, verbal comprehension, phoneme awareness, naming speed, set-shifting, internalizing psychopathology, externalizing psychopathology, academic functioning, neuropsychological deficits
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Cognition Disorders, Diseases in Twins, Dyslexia, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Comorbidity, Dyscalculia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review