Volume 13 - Articles-1402                   MEJDS (2023) 13: 124 | Back to browse issues page

Ethics code: IR.SUMS.REC.1401.213

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Akhlaghi Yazdi Nejad F, Rahimi C, Mohammadi N, Sarafraz M R. Comparing the Effectiveness of Sensory Integration Method and Central Nervous System Reorganization Method on Visual-Spatial Skills of Students with Special Learning Disorder. MEJDS 2023; 13 :124-124
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-2895-en.html
1- PhD Student, Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
2- Professor, Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
Abstract:   (852 Views)

Abstract
Background & Objectives: Learning is the most basic process by which an apprentice becomes a master with cognitive skills and thinking power. Some people face problems in the normal routine of teaching and learning. Some of these people are students with special learning disabilities that are classified as neurodevelopmental disorders. According to DSM–5, specific learning disorder is accompanied by deficits in reading, writing, and mathematics. Considering this topic's importance, it seems necessary to use methods to help solve these children's problems. Regarding the education and treatment of learning disorders, one of the most important methods is the sensory integration method. Sensory integration refers to processes whose information enters the brain through the eyes, ears, mouth, nose, skin, muscles, joints, and sense of balance. The method of reorganizing the central nerves, based on movement therapy and neuromuscular retraining programs, tries to use and consolidate the previously unacquired movement patterns from the lower parts of the brain. The present study compared the effectiveness of the sensory integration and central nervous system reorganization methods on the visual–spatial skills of students with specific learning disabilities.

Methods: This quasi–experimental research employed a pretest–posttest and a follow–up design with a control group. The statistical population of this research included all students with specific learning disabilities (reading/writing, math, and mixed disabilities) who were referred to educational and clinical centers in Rafsanjan City, Iran, in the 2020–2021 academic year. Of them, 90 qualified volunteers (30 with reading/writing disabilities, 30 people with mathematics disabilities, and 30 people with mixed disabilities) were included in the study using available and targeted sampling methods. Then, they were randomly assigned to three groups: sensory integration, central nervous reorganization experimental, and control. The inclusion criteria were as follows: having a learning disability, being 13 to 15 years old, showing normal intelligence, lacking problems like hyperactivity, and not having special mental or physical problems. The exclusion criteria were as follows: absence of more than one session, non–cooperation of the child or family, hyperactivity of the child, and not tolerating the study conditions.

The first experimental group received the sensory integration training program in 12 ninety–minute sessions using the Ayres (1972) theoretical and therapeutic principles of sensorimotor integration. The second experimental group received the central nervous system reorganization training program in 8 ninety–minute sessions using the theoretical and therapeutic bases of Delacato (1992). No intervention was provided to the control group during this period. The research data was collected using the visual–spatial memory test of Cornoldi (1998). Data were analyzed using repeated measurement with mixed design and multivariate analysis of variance at a significance level of 0.05 using SPSS software version 24.

Results: There was a significant difference between the experimental group of sensory integration and the control group in the visual–spatial skills of children with learning disabilities (p<0.001), as well as between the central nervous system reorganization group and the control group in the visual–spatial skills of children with learning disabilities. There was a significant difference in learning (p<0.001), but no significant difference was observed between the two groups of sensory integration and reorganization of central nerves in visual–spatial skills in the general state. Also, in the sensory integration and central nervous system reorganization groups, there was a significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores and between the pretest and follow–up scores in terms of visual–spatial skills scores (p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the posttest and follow–up scores in the sensory integration and central nervous system reorganization groups, indicating that the interventions of sensory integration and reorganization of the central nerves continued in the follow–up phase. Also, the effect of the disorder and its interaction with group and time was not significant, and the results showed no difference between the experimental groups in the three categories of disorders (reading/writing, math, and mixed).

Conclusion: Based on the findings of the research and considering the follow–up tests, it was concluded that the sensory integration and reorganization of the central nervous system reorganization methods had the same effect on the visual–spatial skills of children with learning disabilities. Both methods in this research equally increased the visual–spatial skills of children with a learning disorder.

Full-Text [PDF 718 kb]   (240 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research Article | Subject: Psychology

References
1. 1. Khalili M, Emadian SO, Hassanzadeh R. Effectiveness of attention training based on Fletcher's program, Delacato's neuropsychological treatment, and computerized cognitive rehabilitation on executive functions in children with special learning disability. Int Clin Neurosci J. 2020;8(1):30–6.‌ [DOI]
2. 2. Clark CAC, Pritchard VE, Woodward LJ. Preschool executive functioning abilities predict early mathematics achievement. Dev Psychol. 2010;46(5):1176–91. [DOI]
3. 3. Karimi Bahrasemani A, Chorami M, Sharifi T, Ghazanfari A. Effectiveness of sensory-motor integration on self-esteem and performance mathematical in male students with math learning disorder in Kerman. Journal of Exceptional Children. 2021;21(2):101–10. [Persian] [Article]
4. 4. Naji ES, Shokoohi-Yekta M, Hasanzadeh S. Effectiveness of working memory educational program on phonological working memory and phonemic awareness in dyslexic students: a neuropsychological study. Neuropsychology. 2020;5(19):25–40. [Persian] [Article]
5. 5. Van Der Sluis S, Van Der Leij A, De Jong PF. Working memory in Dutch children with reading- and arithmetic-related LD. J Learn Disabil. 2005;38(3):207–21. [DOI]
6. 6. Rudkin SJ, Pearson DG, Logie RH. Executive processes in visual and spatial working memory tasks. Q J Exp Psychol. 2007;60(1):79–100.‌ [DOI]
7. 7. Tafti MA, Boyle R, Crawford CM. Meta-analysis of visual-spatial deficits in dyslexia. International Journal of Brain and Cognitive Sciences. 2014;3(1):25–34.‌ [DOI]
8. 8. Matteucci MC, Soncini A. Self-efficacy and psychological well-being in a sample of Italian university students with and without specific learning disorder. Res Dev Disabil. 2021;110:103858. [DOI]
9. 9. Döhla D, Heim S. Developmental dyslexia and dysgraphia: what can we learn from the one about the other? Front Psychol. 2016;6:2045. [DOI]
10. 10. Normand S, Tannock R. Screening for working memory deficits in the classroom: the psychometric properties of the working memory rating scale in a longitudinal school-based study. J Atten Disord. 2014;18(4):294–304. [DOI]
11. 11. Alloway TP, Gathercole SE, Elliott J. Examining the link between working memory behaviour and academic attainment in children with ADHD. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010;52(7):632–6. [DOI]
12. 12. Bacon AM, Parmentier FBR, Barr P. Visuospatial memory in dyslexia: evidence for strategic deficits. Memory. 2013;21(2):189–209. [DOI]
13. 13. Sharifi AA, Davari R. Prevalence of learning disabilities in first and second grade students of elementary school in Chaharmahal Va bakhtiari Province. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 2011;1(2):63–76. [Persian] [Article]
14. 14. Harandi V, Soltani A, Manzari Tavakoli A, Zeinadini Z. The role of marital satisfaction and parenting style in function reading in children with specific learning disorder. Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies. ‌2016;8:62. [Persian] [Article]
15. 15. Cornoldi C, De Beni R, Giusberti F, Massironi M. Memory and imagery: a visual trace is not a mental image. In: Conway MA, Gathercole SE, Cornoldi C; editors. Theories of memory II. First edition. London: Psychology Press; 1998.‌
16. 16. Ladani Far N, Shojaee S, Hemati Alamdarloo Gh. The effectiveness of linguistic plays program on working memory of male students with dyslexia. J Except Educ. 2016;4(141):32–8. [Persian] [Article]
17. 17. Rini W. Perceptual-motor developmental equipment ideans & activites. Sazmand AH, Tabatabaie Nia M. (Persian translator). Tehran: Danjeh Publication; 2020. [Persian]
18. 18. Tabrizi M, Rahmani N. 100 gam monazam baraye darman narasakhani [100 regular steps to treat dyslexia]. Tehran: Fararavan Publication; 2019. [Persian]
19. 19. Karimi Lichahi R, Akbari B, Hoseinkhanzadeh AA, Asadi Majreh S. The effectiveness of sensory-motor integration trainingon working memory and visual-motor coordination of dyslexic students. J Except Educ. 2021;21(1):59–70. [Persian] [Article]
20. 20. Kumar SP. Improving working memory in science learning through effective multisensory integration approach. International Journal of Mind, Brain & Cognition. 2018;9(1-2):83–93.‌ [Article]
21. 21. Passolunghi MC, Mammarella IC. Selective spatial working memory impairment in a group of children with mathematics learning disabilities and poor problem-solving skills. J Learn Disabil. 2012;45(4):341–50. [DOI]
22. 22. Finke K, Bublak P, Zihl J. Visual spatial and visual pattern working memory: Neuropsychological evidence for a differential role of left and right dorsal visual brain. Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(4):649–61. [DOI]
23. 23. Holmes J, Adams JW. Working memory and children's mathematical skills: implications for mathematical development and mathematics curricula. Educational Psychology. 2006;26(3):339–66. [DOI]
24. 24. Pourmohammadreza Tajrishi M, Pahlavan Neshan S, Golkar F. The effectiveness of phonological awareness training on visuospatial working memory of students with written expression disorder. Developmental Psychology: Iranian Psychologists. 2019;15(60):355–66. [Persian] [Article]
25. 25. Salimi Teymouri B. Barrasi tasire ravesh darmani delacato bar narasakhani roshdi danesh amoozan dokhtar dore ebtedaei shahrestan boroojerd dar sal tahsili 85–86 [Investigating the effect of Delacato's neuro-therapeutic method on developmental dyslexia of elementary school girl students in Borujerd city in the academic year 85–86] [Thesis for MSc]. [Tehran, Iran]: Tarbiat Moalem University; 2007. [Persian]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2025 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb