Is it memory or phonological difficulty?

ABSTRACT The continuing discussion concerning the relationship between short‐term auditory memory (STAM) skills and phonological difficulties was explored in one subject (aged 12;11) with a residual immature speech pattern, poor auditory and phonological analysis skills, and specific language difficulties. The views to be considered include: (1) That poor STAM reflects a weak knowledge of language (Bloom & Lahey, 1978); (2) That poor storage within STAM results in language difficulties (Gathercole & Baddeley, 1990); (3) That phonological processing difficulties lead to imitations in the phonological component of working memory (Brady, 1991); or (4) That there is a disassociation of phonological processing skills and STAM (Pennington, Van Orden, Kirson & Haith, 1991). A battery of five experiments to test components of the working memory model designed by Gathercole and Baddeley (1990) was administered. These consisted of non‐word repetition, serial word recall of phonologically similar and phonologically dissimilar words, an auditory discrimination task, and two tests to assess speech rate. The first two tests are felt to assess phonological memory skills. The tests had previously been administered to a group of 10‐year‐old dyslexic subjects and their normal age‐matched controls by Nicolson and Fawcett (personal communication). The subject converted non‐words to real words or phrases retaining the syllable structure. He did not show evidence of a phonological similarity effect, indicating that he may have been relying on information other than phonological. He displayed some phonological discrimination difficulties. His articulation time was slower than the dyslexic subjects and the controls, especially for long words. His voice latency was difficult to evaluate. It appears from this evidence that the subject was attempting to use his weak phonological skills, but was supporting these with other, possibly semantic, skills. The results appear to indicate that the subject has a weak phonological store in his working memory. It is difficult to argue, though, that the capacity of the phonological store has affected the subject's auditory and phonological difficulties. It would appear that perceptual and phonological processing difficulties have resulted in the subject attempting to utilise other linguistic skills available when pressured to analyse speech. This explanation would reinforce the arguments of Bloom and Lahey (1978) or Brady (1991). This allows the professionals working with the subject to consider multiple strategies for word recall, analysis and manipulation, possibly drawing on the semantic strategies he is already developing.