Academic achievement following childhood brain disease: implications for the concept of learning disabilities.

The present study examined three hypotheses regarding the consequences of early brain damage for academic achievement: First, early brain insults will have a negative impact on achievement, even in children with normal intelligence. Second, underachievement in these children will be at least partially independent of IQ (i.e., not fully accounted for by a lowering of IQ within the average range). Third, normally intelligent children with histories of brain insult will also manifest selective cognitive dysfunctions. To test these hypotheses, we compared two groups of children who had recovered from Haemophilus influenzae type b meningitis. The "complicated" group consisted of children who, as a consequence of having sustained neurologic complications during their illness, were more likely to have had brain insults. Children in the "uncomplicated" group did not have complications with their illness and were regarded as having escaped significant central nervous system (CNS) pathology. Only children with normal hearing and a prorated Full Scale IQ of at least 80 (WISC-R) were considered. Group differences on the Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised were consistent with the first two hypotheses. Although the two groups had similar Verbal IQs, the complicated group also had a lower mean Performance IQ and performed less well on perceptually demanding neuropsychological tasks. Findings suggest that learning disabilities may have selective, brain-related cognitive antecedents; but they challenge the practice of using IQ criteria for clinical diagnosis.     

Book Reviews

Zuckerman: Scientist Extraordinary by Bernard Donovan BioScientifica, Bristol, 2005, 555pp. ISBN 1‐901978249 £24.95 Negotiating licences for digital resources by Fiona Durrant Facet Publishing, 2006, ISBN 1 85604 586 2 Metadata for Information Management and Retrieval By David Haynes Facet Publishing, 2004, ISBN 1 85604 4890     

Another Look at What Moves Public Opinion: Media Agenda Setting and Polls in the 2000 U.S. Election

This study examined two levels of media agenda effects on aggregatepublic opinion from different news sources. The effects wereinvestigated immediately and cumulatively. Content analysisdata from the 2000 U.S. presidential election coverage by fournational news organizations were related to the Gallup pre-electionpoll standings of each candidate. Regression analyses foundthat both the salience of a candidate and the salience of theattributes of a candidate cumulatively, but not immediately,influenced his standing in the polls. An analysis of news sourcessupported the finding that the two levels of agenda-settingeffects seemed mostly cumulative rather than immediate. Newsfrom different sources, however, tended to have effects of differentdegrees and sometimes different directions on candidate pollstandings. Cumulative effects of candidate salience on aggregateopinion change were found for non-partisan and neutral newssources—reporters, poll reporting and public documents—whereasthe effects of candidate attribute salience mostly came frompartisan sources—the candidate himself and members ofthe competing political party. Possible political implicationsof these findings are discussed.