People with MLD show medium pooled deficits in working memory (g = 0.68) and rapid automatized naming (g = 0.70)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2028: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 MLD groups showed medium-effect working memory differences versus typical groups, Hedges's g = 0.68, p < .001, across 513 effect sizes from 111 studies. → Kroesbergen 2023 q3 i2 MLD groups showed a significant medium RAN deficit, Hedges's g = 0.70, p < .001, across 69 effect sizes from 29 studies. → Kroesbergen 2023 (2)

Evidence¶

Kroesbergen 2023¶

Kroesbergen, E. H.; Huijsmans, M. D. E.; Friso-van den Bos, I. (2023). A Meta-Analysis on the Differences in Mathematical and Cognitive Skills Between Individuals With and Without Mathematical Learning Disabilities. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221132773

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3

Meta-analytic unconditional model of 513 working-memory effect sizes from 111 studies. The pooled MLD deficit was "Hedges's g = 0.68", p < .001; trim-and-fill adjusted it to g = 0.61.

"On average, there were significant differences of a medium effect size between groups, Hedges's g = 0.68, p < .001."

Kroesbergen 2023 (2)¶

Kroesbergen, E. H.; Huijsmans, M. D. E.; Friso-van den Bos, I. (2023). A Meta-Analysis on the Differences in Mathematical and Cognitive Skills Between Individuals With and Without Mathematical Learning Disabilities. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221132773

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3

Meta-analytic unconditional model of 69 RAN effect sizes from 29 studies. The pooled MLD deficit was "Hedges's g = 0.70", p < .001; trim-and-fill adjusted it to g = 0.59. The authors caution these results should be interpreted with extreme caution due to small degrees of freedom.

"The unconditional model returned a significant medium effect size of Hedges's g = 0.70, p < .001."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Processing Speed — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• People with MLD show a large pooled deficit in mathematics performance versus typically performing peers (g = 1.52) — related
• People with MLD show lower number sense than typically developing peers (g = 0.88), with the largest deficits on mapping tasks — related
• Children with MLD show pervasive working memory deficits while both LA groups score in the average range on all three working memory components — related