Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Effect sizes (d) of differences between participants with reading disabilities and participants without reading disabilities.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 1.

Power of study as a function of sample size.

This figure shows the power of a study with two independent groups as a function of sample size for different levels of effect size (assuming that alpha, 2-tailed, is set at.05). For a small effect size (d = .2) we would need two samples of 393 participants to yield a power of 80%. This means that there is 80% chance of finding a significant difference between the groups, given that an effect of this size exists at the population level. For a medium effect size (d = .5) we would need two samples of 64 participants to achieve this level of power. For a large effect size (d = .8) we need 26 participants per group.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 2.

General information on the control group and the group with dyslexia.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Reliability and validity indices for the different subtests of the KAIT [45].

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Reliability indices for the different subtests of the GL&SCHR [44].

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Performances of students with dyslexia on literacy skills in comparison with their non-dyslexic peers.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Performances of students with dyslexia on phonological skills and processing skills in comparison with their non-dyslexic peers.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Performances of students with dyslexia on general intelligence in comparison with their non-dyslexic peers.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Table 8.

Correspondence between the effect sizes reported in English and the effect sizes found in the current study.

More »

Table 8 Expand