Assessment & Research

Executive functions in adults with developmental dyslexia.

Smith-Spark et al. (2016) · Research in developmental disabilities 2016
★ The Verdict

Adults with dyslexia show steady executive-function weaknesses that outlast childhood reading intervention.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who write job-support or academic plans for adults with dyslexia.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only serve young children receiving first-time reading instruction.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Schertz et al. (2016) compared adults with dyslexia to adults without it. They gave both groups the same set of executive-function tests and self-report checklists.

The team looked at skills like planning, working memory, and impulse control. They wanted to see if dyslexia in adults brings extra EF weaknesses beyond reading trouble.

02

What they found

Adults with dyslexia scored lower on almost every EF measure. The gaps showed up on paper surveys and on hands-on lab tasks.

In short, the dyslexic group had measurable executive-function deficits, not just spelling or decoding problems.

03

How this fits with other research

Van Hanegem et al. (2014) seems to disagree. They tracked dyslexic children over time and found EF did not predict later reading or spelling gains. The key difference is age: kids after remediation may outgrow EF-literacy links, while adults still show the deficits.

Ma et al. (2016) narrows the gap to one EF piece: inhibition. Using brain waves, they showed dyslexic children struggle to ignore distractions. H et al. extend that weakness into adulthood and across more EF domains.

Tal Saban et al. (2014) used the same adult, quasi-experimental design with young adults who have developmental coordination disorder. Both studies find medium, negative EF effects, showing the method works for spotting subtle cognitive gaps in neurodivergent adults.

04

Why it matters

If you assess or employ adults with dyslexia, plan for executive-function support. Provide written instructions in short chunks, allow extra time for shifting between tasks, and offer checklists for multi-step assignments. These tweaks honor both their reading profile and the EF data shown here.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Break long verbal directions into three-item written checklists and review them aloud.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
quasi experimental
Population
other
Finding
negative

03Original abstract

BACKGROUND: Executive functioning (EF) deficits are well recognized in developmental dyslexia, yet the majority of studies have concerned children rather than adults, ignored the subjective experience of the individual with dyslexia (with regard to their own EFs), and have not followed current theoretical perspectives on EFs. AIMS AND METHODS: The current study addressed these shortfalls by administering a self-report measure of EF (BRIEF-A; Roth, Isquith, & Gioia, 2005) and experimental tasks to IQ-matched groups of adults with and without dyslexia. The laboratory-based tasks tested the three factors constituting the framework of EF proposed by Miyake et al. (2000). RESULTS: In comparison to the group without dyslexia, the participants with dyslexia self-reported more frequent EF problems in day-to-day life, with these difficulties centering on metacognitive processes (working memory, planning, task monitoring, and organization) rather than on the regulation of emotion and behaviour. The participants with dyslexia showed significant deficits in EF (inhibition, set shifting, and working memory). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The findings indicated that dyslexia-related problems have an impact on the daily experience of adults with the condition. Further, EF difficulties are present in adulthood across a range of laboratory-based measures, and, given the nature of the experimental tasks presented, extend beyond difficulties related solely to phonological processing.

Research in developmental disabilities, 2016 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2016.03.001