Reading Research Literature: Identification and Retrieval

Edward G. Summers

doi:10.2307/747096

Back to the Basics: Reading Research Literature

ASHA Leader ◽

10.1044/leader.ftr6.11052006.10 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 11 (5) ◽

pp. 10-35 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lee Ann C. Golper ◽

Robert T. Wertz ◽

Karen E. Brown

Keyword(s):

Research Literature ◽

Reading Research

Download Full-text

Douglas G. McNeel: stay current reading research literature, there is no substitute for hard work!

Chinese Clinical Oncology ◽

10.21037/cco.2018.09.01 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 7 (6) ◽

pp. 63-63

Author(s):

Brad Li

Keyword(s):

Research Literature ◽

Hard Work ◽

Reading Research

Download Full-text

Research on Reading: What SLPs Want (or Need) to Know

Perspectives on School-Based Issues ◽

10.1044/sbi10.2.65 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 65-68 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Judy Montgomery

Keyword(s):

Spoken Language ◽

Cognitive Skill ◽

Language Intervention ◽

Reading Teachers ◽

Successful Therapy ◽

Speech Language Pathologists ◽

Reading Research ◽

Reading And Writing ◽

Language Problems

Abstract As increasing numbers of speech language pathologists (SLPs) have embraced their burgeoning roles in written as well as spoken language intervention, they have recognized that there is much to be gained from the research in reading. While some SLPs reportedly fear they will “morph” into reading teachers, many more are confidently aware that SLPs who work with adult clients routinely use reading as one of their rehabilitation modalities. Reading functions as both a tool to reach language in adults, and as a measure of successful therapy. This advanced cognitive skill can serve the same purpose for children. Language is the foundational support to reading. Consequently spoken language problems are often predictors of reading and writing challenges that may be ahead for the student (Juel & Deffes, 2004; Moats, 2001; Wallach, 2004). A targeted review of reading research may assist the SLP to appreciate the language/reading interface.

Download Full-text

What Have We Learned From Physiological Approaches to Characterizing Dysarthria and Other Speech Production Disorders?

Perspectives on Speech Science and Orofacial Disorders ◽

10.1044/ssod20.2.37 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 20 (2) ◽

pp. 37-46

Author(s):

Nicole M. Etter

Keyword(s):

Speech Production ◽

Speech Disorders ◽

Research Literature ◽

Systematic Research ◽

Physiological Measures ◽

Validity And Reliability ◽

Assessment Measures ◽

Perceptual Assessment ◽

Perceptual Characteristics ◽

Diagnostic Resolution

Traditionally, speech-language pathologists (SLP) have been trained to develop interventions based on a select number of perceptual characteristics of speech without or through minimal use of objective instrumental and physiologic assessment measures of the underlying articulatory subsystems. While indirect physiological assumptions can be made from perceptual assessment measures, the validity and reliability of those assumptions are tenuous at best. Considering that neurological damage will result in various degrees of aberrant speech physiology, the need for physiologic assessments appears highly warranted. In this context, do existing physiological measures found in the research literature have sufficient diagnostic resolution to provide distinct and differential data within and between etiological classifications of speech disorders and versus healthy controls? The goals of this paper are (a) to describe various physiological and movement-related techniques available to objectively study various dysarthrias and speech production disorders and (b) to develop an appreciation for the need for increased systematic research to better define physiologic features of dysarthria and speech production disorders and their relation to know perceptual characteristics.

Download Full-text