學習障礙學生之認知抑制能力探究
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2014-09-??
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
國立台灣師範大學特殊教育中心
National Taiwan Normal University Special Education Center
National Taiwan Normal University Special Education Center
Abstract
本文首先針對認知抑制之基本理論，以及拼音語系國家中學習障礙學生認知抑制缺陷之相關研究進行探究。根據學習障礙之異質性對於認知抑制的影響，過去的研究主要有兩個結果：首先，學障學生中之閱讀缺陷型學生在語言型認知抑制測驗中的表現，均顯著落後於普通學生與／或數學障礙學生；再者，學障學生中之數學缺陷型學生在非語言型認知抑制測驗中的表現，均顯著落後於普通學生與／或閱讀障礙學生。為更深入探討此議題，本文進一步將各相關研究所使用之測驗工具分別討論，發現這些工具可被區分為語言類（Stroop作業與Navon作業）與非語言類（大小比較作業、數字抑制作業以及圖形抑制作業）兩類，而此區分方式則符合不同類別學習障礙學生之不一致認知抑制缺陷的結果，此外，目前學習障礙學生認知抑制缺陷之相關研究皆於拼音語系國家，較少被於漢語系統國家之學者所重視，可供未來研究者參考。
The present paper discussed the fundamental theories of cognitive inhibition and the effect of cognitive inhibition to human’s learning at first and analyzed the relevant studies about cognitive inhibition deficit of students with learning disabilities. Two kinds of results came out: reading disabled students were significantly worse than typical developing students and mathematics disabled students, and mathematics disabled students significantly worse than typical developing students and reading disabled students. The inconsistent results made the deeper investigation of this issue, and classifying cognitive inhibition tasks in all relevant studies as language type and non-language type which was consistent to the inconsistent results above. In addition, lack of the relevant studies in Chinese language countries was another important point in this issue.
The present paper discussed the fundamental theories of cognitive inhibition and the effect of cognitive inhibition to human’s learning at first and analyzed the relevant studies about cognitive inhibition deficit of students with learning disabilities. Two kinds of results came out: reading disabled students were significantly worse than typical developing students and mathematics disabled students, and mathematics disabled students significantly worse than typical developing students and reading disabled students. The inconsistent results made the deeper investigation of this issue, and classifying cognitive inhibition tasks in all relevant studies as language type and non-language type which was consistent to the inconsistent results above. In addition, lack of the relevant studies in Chinese language countries was another important point in this issue.