本研究旨在探討VLD和NLD學生在WISC-IV測驗結果表現特徵之差異情形、不同性別與就學階段之VLD和NLD學生在WISC-IV測驗結果表現特徵之差異情形以及不同性別與就學階段之VLD和NLD學生在學業成就與學習行為表現之差異情形。本研究以桃園縣、新竹市、新竹縣、苗栗縣四縣市國民中小學98~99學年度經「特殊教育學生鑑定及就學輔導會」鑑定，確定符合學習障礙鑑定原則及本研究所界定之VLD和NLD標準之學生為研究對象。將以所得之有效樣本進行描述性統計、獨立樣本t檢定、卡方檢定χ2、二因子變異數分析等統計方法之分析。本研究發現之主要結論如下：
一、LD學生在語文題材的分測驗中，以「數．字序列」的得分
為最高，「算術」的得分為最低。在作業題材部份，以「圖
畫補充」的得分為最高，「符號替代」的得分為最低；符合
「ACVS」與「部分ACVS」組型的比例分別為0.22%與3.78%；
FSIQ之表現顯著低於一般學生一個標準差左右。VCI、WMI
、PRI及PSI與一般學生相比較均低將近一個標準差，而PSI
為四項組合分數中之最低分；DSB的得分高於DSF的得分，
符合者佔整體之49.1%。
二、VLD學生顯著高於NLD學生之分測驗分別為「圖形設計」、
「圖畫概念」、「矩陣推理」、「數．字序列」、「符號替代」以
及「符號尋找」；NLD學生顯著高於VLD學生之分測驗則為
「類同」、「詞彙」、「理解」以及「常識」；VLD學生符合「ACVS」
組型者佔0.32%，符合「部份ACVS」組型者佔4.11%，而
NLD學生符合「部份ACVS」組型者佔2.98%；VLD和NLD
學生其FSIQ之表現均顯著低於一般學生一個標準差左右，
但彼此無顯著差異。VLD學生在PRI、WMI與PSI顯著高於
NLD學生，NLD學生在VCI顯著高於VLD學生。另VLD
學生其PRI顯著高於VCI，NLD學生其VCI顯著高於PRI。
VLD學生其DSF－DSB差異多為DSB高於DSF，符合者佔
53.02%；NLD學生其DSF－DSB差異多為DSF高於DSB，
符合者佔49.61%。
三、VLD和NLD組別中，男女的比例皆約為2：1。LD學生中
男性出現率高於女性之結果，並沒有因分亞型而有所差異。
四、無論是VLD或NLD學生，男女性仍皆符合VLD學生其作業
表現優於語文表現之特徵，NLD學生其語文表現優於作業表現之特徵。VLD學生其男性在較多數作業題材之分測驗表現優於女性，而兩類型LD學生在「圖畫補充」分測驗皆為男性顯著高於女性。相較於VLD學生其男女性在分測驗及歷程分數的部份差異，NLD學生之表現較不受性別因素之影響。
五、國小與國中階段之VLD或NLD學生，仍皆符合VLD學生其
作業表現優於語文表現之特徵，NLD學生其語文表現優於作
業表現之特徵。VLD學生部份語文能力並未隨年齡增長而
有所進步。但NLD學生隨著年齡的增長，不管在語文或是
作業題材的表現，以及FSIQ、PRI與WMI，都有顯著的進
步。
六、考量LD學生之背景變項時，WISC-IV中分測驗量表分數、
組合分數及歷程分數之表現皆未受「性別×組別」交互作用
之影響。
七、考量LD學生之背景變項時，受「就學階段×組別」交互作用
之影響時，不論就學階段為國小或國中，NLD學生其VCI
及「詞彙」、「理解」、「常識」分測驗均顯著高於VLD
學生。而就學階段為國小時，VLD學生在「圖畫補充」、「數．
字序列」、「算術」分測驗、FSIQ以及WMI顯著高於NLD
學生。
八、VLD學生在「中文年級認字量表」及「閱讀理解困難篩選測
驗」之通過率均顯著低於NLD學生。而同時考量性別與就
學階段背景變項時，VLD學生在「中文年級認字量表」之表
現，國小階段之女性通過的比率顯著高於男性。在「基礎數
學概念評量」部分，無論男女性之VLD，國小通過的比率均
顯著高於國中。而NLD學生則皆無顯著差異。
九、VLD和NLD學生在「國民中小學學習行為特徵檢核表」六
項分量表之表現皆未達顯著差異。而同時考量性別與就學階
段背景變項時，在「理解與表達」、「知動協調」、「情緒
表現」以及「全量表」部份，國小與國中階段之VLD女性
達很頻繁的比率皆顯著高於男性。另在「注意與記憶」、「理
解與表達」、「知動協調」、「情緒表現」以及「全量表」
部份，國小階段之NLD女性達很頻繁的比率皆顯著高於男
性。

本研究依據上述結論，提出對於教育與未來研究的建議，以供特殊教育教師與研究人員、學習障礙鑑定相關人員對於VLD和NLD學生有更深入的認識

The major purposes of the study were to investigate the different characteristics of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition(WISC-IV), academic achievements and learning behavior between students with Verbal learning disabilities(VLD) and Nonverbal learning disabilities(NLD). The subjects were elementary and junior high school students who came from Tao-Yuan county, Hsin-Chu city, Hsin-Chu county, and Miao-Li county that had been considered as learning disabilities(LD) by official processing and in keeping with the definitions of the study in year 2009 to 2011. Frequency distributions, t-test, qui-square and two-way ANOVA were used to analyze the data in the paper.
The major findings of this study are as follows：
1.LD students earned the highest scores in Letter-Number Sequencing subtest and the lowest scores in Arithmetic subtest within the verbal subtests. Besides, LD students earned the highest scores in Picture Completion subtest and the lowest scores in Coding subtest within the performance subtests. In the LD students, 0.22% were in keeping with “ACVS” pattern, and 3.78% were in keeping with “Partial ACVS” pattern. LD’s FSIQ was significantly lower than general students about one standard deviation in statistics. When comparing to general students, VCI, WMI, PRI, and PSI were lower and close to one standard deviation, and PSI was the lowest scores of the four Composites. In the LD students, 49.1% were manifested the characteristic of DSB＞DSF.
2.The scores of the VLD students in the subtests (including Block Design, Picture Concepts, Matrix Reasoning, Letter-Number Sequencing, Coding and Symbol Search) was significantly higher than NLD students in statistics. The scores of the NLD students in the subtests (including Similarities, Vocabulary, Comprehension and Information) was significantly higher than VLD students in statistics. 0.32% were in keeping with “ACVS” pattern, and 4.11% were in keeping with “Partial ACVS” pattern for students with VLD. 2.98% were in keeping with “Partial ACVS” pattern for students with NLD. FSIQ of the VLD students and NLD students were both significantly lower than general students about one standard deviation in statistics. Besides, FSIQ of the VLD students and NLD students had no discrepancy to each other. The scores of the VLD students in the Composites (including PRI, WMI and PSI) was significantly higher than NLD students in statistics. The scores of the NLD students in VCI was significantly higher than VLD students in statistics. PRI was significantly higher than VCI in statistics for students with VLD. VCI was significantly higher than PRI in statistics for students with NLD. 53.02% manifested the characteristic of DSB＞DSF for students with VLD, and 49.61% manifested the characteristic of DSF＞DSB for students with NLD.
3.Both VLD students and NLD students manifested the result that the rate of gender was 2：1. The fact that female LD students are outnumbered by male LD students makes no difference with VLD or NLD.
4.Students with VLD performed better in performance subtests than in verbal subtests in spite of their gender. Students with NLD performed better in verbal subtests than in performance subtests makes no difference in considering with their gender, too. Male VLD students performed significantly higher than female VLD students in statistics in most of performance subtests. Both of the VLD and NLD students, male performed significantly higher than female in statistics in Picture Completion subtest. However, NLD students were less influenced by the factor of gender than VLD students.
5.Both VLD students and NLD students at Elementary and junior high school level conformed to the result that students with VLD performed better in performance subtests than in verbal subtests and students with NLD performed better in verbal subtests than in performance subtests. Part of the verbal ability of VLD students doesn’t improve along with the age. However, no matter in verbal, performance subtest, FSIQ, PRI or WMI NLD students made great progress along with the age.
6.Concerning with the background of the LD students, subtests, composites and process scores were not influenced by the reciprocal effect of gender and LD’s group.
7.Concerning with the background of the LD students, the scores of the NLD students in VCI, Vocabulary, Comprehension and Information was significantly higher than VLD students in statistics in spite of educational levels. The scores of the VLD students in Picture Completion, Letter-Number Sequencing, Arithmetic, FSIQ and WMI was significantly higher than NLD students in statistics in the elementary school level.
8.The passing rate of the VLD students in academic achievement tests (including word recognition and reading comprehension) was significantly less than NLD students in statistics. Concerning with the factors of gender and educational levels at the same time, the passing rate of the female VLD students was significantly higher than male VLD students in statistics in the test of word recognition in the elementary school level. No matter the male or female of VLD students, the passing rate of elementary school students was significantly higher than that of junior high school students in statistics. But there was no discrepancy between NLD students.
9.VLD and NLD students had no discrepancy between the six subtests in the Learning Characteristics Checklist. Concerning with the factors of gender and educational levels at the same time, the rate of female VLD students that came up to the frequency was significantly higher than male in statistics in the four subtests(including comprehension and expression, motor coordination, emotional performance, and full scale) in the elementary and junior high school levels. The rate of female NLD students that came up to the frequency was significantly higher than male in statistics in the five subtests(including attention and memory, comprehension and expression, motor coordination, emotional performance, and full scale) in the elementary school level.

The results of this study provide suggestions for educational and future studies that help the special education teachers and researchers to understand VLD and NLD students more.

目錄
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的與待答問題 7
第三節 名詞釋義 9
第二章 文獻探討 13
第一節 VLD與NLD的定義與特徵 13
第二節 VLD與NLD之鑑定與分類標準 27
第三節 WISC-IV之應用與解釋 41
第四節 VLD與NLD於WISC表現特徵相關之研究 55
第三章 研究方法 69
第一節 研究架構 69
第二節 研究對象 70
第三節 研究工具 71
第四節 研究流程 73
第五節 資料處理與分析 74
第四章 研究結果與討論 77
第一節 樣本基本資料之描述性分析 77
第二節 VLD和NLD學生在WISC-IV測驗結果表現特徵分析 80
第三節 不同性別與就學階段之VLD和NLD學生在WISC-IV測驗結果表現特徵分析 93
第四節 不同性別與就學階段之VLD和NLD學生在學業成就及學習行為表現特徵之分析 136
第五節 研究結果討論 164
第五章 結論與建議 171
第一節 研究結論 171
第二節 研究建議 175
參考書目 178
一、中文參考書目 178
二、英文參考書目 183

一、中文參考書目
王淑惠（2006）。國小原住民學習障礙兒童與非原住民學習障礙
兒童在魏氏兒童智力量表的表現分析。東台灣特殊教育學
報，8，191-214。
內政部（2009）。身心障礙者權益保障法〔公告〕。台北市：內政部。2010年11月10日，取自：
http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=D0050046
吳沛璇（2009）。亞斯柏格症學生在魏氏兒童智力量表-第四版的表現。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。
何華國（2007）。特殊兒童心理與教育-修訂版（4版）。台北：心
理。
周台傑（2000）。學習障礙學生鑑定原則鑑定基準說明。載於張蓓莉（主編），身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定原則鑑定基準說明手冊。台北：教育部特殊教育工作小組。
周台傑（2006）。學習障礙者教育。載於許天威、徐享良、張勝成（主編），新特殊教育通論第二版（72頁）。台北：五南。
林怡芳（2008）。國小非語文型與語文型學習障礙學生適應功能之比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。
孟瑛如（2006）。資源教室方案-班級經營與補救教學(第二版)。
台北：五南。
孟瑛如（2007）。學習障礙與補救教學¬-教師及家長實用手冊(第二版)。台北：五南。
孟瑛如（2010）。看見特殊，看見潛能-特殊生教師家長貼心手冊。
台北：心理。
孟瑛如、陳麗如（2000）。學習障礙學生在魏氏兒童智力量表上
顯現之特質研究。特殊教育季刊，74，1-11。
孟瑛如、陳麗如（2002）。國民中小學學習行為特徵檢核表。臺
北：心理。
胡永崇（2000）。學習障礙者之教育。載於王文科（主編），特殊教育導論（347頁）。台北：心理。
胡永崇（2002）。高雄地區國中三年級學習障礙學生之WISC-Ⅲ
測驗表現分析。屏東師院學報，17，289-328。
胡永崇（2004）。國民中小學閱讀障礙學生之WISC-Ⅲ及基本學
業測驗表現分析。屏東師院學報，20，141-180。
柯華葳（1999a）。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。臺北：行政院國家科
學委員會特殊教育工作小組。
柯華葳（1999b）。基礎數學概念評量。臺北：行政院國家科學委
員會特殊教育工作小組。
洪儷瑜（2000）。台北市國民中學學情障學生鑑定工作手冊。台
北：芳和國中。
洪儷瑜（2006）。學習障礙者教育（2版）。台北：心理。
洪儷瑜（2010）。學習障礙學生的教育。2010年11月9日，取自：
http://www.spc.ntnu.edu.tw/files/elearning/c21.pdf
洪儷瑜、陳淑麗、陳心怡（2003）。學習障礙國中學生的智力特
質之研究。師大學報，48（2），215-238。
桃園縣特殊教育學生鑑定及就學輔導會（2010）。桃園縣99學年度國民中小學學習障礙學生鑑定實施計畫〔公告〕。桃園：桃園縣特殊教育學生鑑定及就學輔導會。2010年12月31日，取自：http://tw.class.urlifelinks.com/class/?csid=css000000079590&id=model4&cl=1284350418-9084-361&mode=con&m4k=1286150865-9442-838&_ulinktreeid=
陳心怡（2006）。WISC-III差異分數信度及其應用限制討論。測驗學刊，53(1)，79-102。
陳心怡、楊宗仁（2000）。WISC-III分測驗特殊組型基本率研究：台灣常模、學習障礙及注意力缺陷過動症兒童之比較。測驗年刊，47(2)，91-110。
陳心怡、朱建軍、陳榮華（2000）。WISC-III分測驗組合之假設解釋與信度估計。特殊教育研究學刊，19，1-14。
陳香吟（2006）。國中語文型與非語文型學習障礙學生社交技巧之
比較研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出
版，彰化。
陳榮華、陳心怡（2007）。魏氏兒童智力量表第四版（中文版）技術和解釋手冊。台北：中國行為科學社。
陳淑麗、洪儷瑜（2003）。學習障礙國中學生在不同差距標準差
距之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，24，85-111。
教育部（1992）。語言障礙、身體病弱、性格異常、行為異常、學習障礙暨多重障礙學生鑑定標準及就學輔導原則要點。臺北：教育部。
教育部特殊兒童普查工作執行小組（1993）。中華民國第二次特殊兒童普查報告。台北，教育部教育研究委員會。
教育部（2006）。身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定標準。臺北：教
育部。
教育部（2009a）。教育部特殊教育通報網〔公告〕。台北市：教育
部。2009年12月23日，取自：http://www.set.edu.tw/judge12/pulist_f0.asp
教育部（2009b）。特殊教育法〔公告〕。台北市：教育部。2010年11月10日，取自：http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=H0080027
教育部（2011a）。教育部特殊教育通報網〔公告〕。台北市：教育
部。2011年6月11日，取自：http://www.set.edu.tw/sta2/frame_print.asp?filename=stuA_city_All_spckind_ABCE/stuA_city_All_spckind_ABCE_20110321.asp
教育部（2011b）。完成國民教育身心障礙學生升學輔導辦法〔公
告〕。台北市：教育部。2011年2月15日，取自：
http://gazette.nat.gov.tw/EG_FileManager/eguploadpub/eg017026/ch05/type1/gov40/num14/Eg.htm
教育部（2011c）。『身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定基準』修正草
案總說明〔公告〕。台北市：教育部。2011年2月21日，取自：http://www.nhcue.edu.tw/~spec/4/99/99042404.pdf
許鈴筑（2009）。花蓮縣原住民學習障礙學童WISC-III智力得分差異分析之研究。國立東華大學身心障礙與輔助科技研究所碩士論文，未出版，花蓮。
鈕文英（2007）。美國身心障礙個體教育增進法案的修訂緣起與內涵。中華民國特殊教育學會年刊，96年度，349-365。
單延愷（2007）。非語文學習障礙篩選量表效度研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系博士論文，未出版，台北。
單延愷、洪儷瑜（2003）。由操作性概念談學習障礙。特殊教育
季刊，87，9-17。
黃秀霜（2001）。中文年級認字量表。臺北：心理。
曾秋芳（2001）。學習障礙學生非語文溝通情緒辨識能力之研究。
國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，彰化。
黃姿慎（2006）。學習障礙學生在魏氏兒童智力量表表現特質之
研究。國立新竹教育大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，
新竹市。
黃莉雯（2008）。國民小學非語文學習障礙學生之數學能力與數
學錯誤類型分析研究─以北部地區為例。國立新竹教育大學
特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
楊坤堂（2008）。學習障礙導論（2版）。台北：五南。
蕭秀蓓（2008）。國中學習障礙學生在魏氏兒童智力量表第三版與
第四版之表現差異比較。中原大學教育研究所碩士論文，未
出版，桃園。
鍾曉芬（2003）。魏氏兒童智力量表第三版（WISC-III）對學習障礙學生診斷功能之探析。台東大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台東。
謝佳燕（2010）。學習障礙學生在魏氏兒童智力量表第四版
（WISC-IV）表現之研究。國立新竹教育大學特殊教育研究所
碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。

二、英文參考書目
Acklin, M. W. (1990). Personality dimensions in two types of learning-disabled children: A rorschach study. Journal of Personality Assessment, 54(1 & 2), 67-77.
Alfonso, V. C., Flanagan, D. P., & Radwan, S. (2005). The impact of the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory on test development and interpretation of cognitive and academic abilities. In D. P. Flanagan, & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary Intellectual Assessment, Second Edition: Theories, Tests, and Issues (pp. 185-202). New York: Guilford Press.
Bender, W. N. (2004). Learning disabilities: characteristics,
identification, and teaching strategies. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Bloom, E., & Heath, N. (2010). Recognition, expression, and understanding facial expressions of emotion in adolescents with nonverbal and general learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(2), 180-192.
Burns, T. G., & O’Leary, S. D. (2004). Wechsler intelligence scale for children-IV: Test review. Applied Neuropsychology, 11(4), 233-236.
Bloom, A. S., Topinka, C. W., Goulet, M., Reese, A., & Podruch, P.
E. (1986). Implications of large WISC/WISC-R
verbal-performance IQ discrepancies. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 42, 353-356.
Chen, H., Keith, T. Z., Chen, Y., & Chang, B. (2009). What does the WISC-IV measure? Validation of the scoring and CHC-based interpretative approaches. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 54(3), 85-108.
Calhoun, S. L., & Mayes, S. D. (2005). Processing speed in children with clinical disorders. Psychology in the Schools, 42(4), 333-343.
Cheramie, G. M., Stafford, M. E., & Mire, S. S. (2008). The WISC-IV general ability index in a non-clinical sample. Journal of Education and Human Development, 2(2), 1-4.
Drummond, C. R., Ahmad, S. A., & Rourke, B. P. (2005). Rules for the classification of younger children with nonverbal learning disabilities and basic phonological processing disabilities. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20, 171-182.
Davis, J. T., Parr, G., & Lan, W. (1997). Differences between learning disability subtypes classified using the revised Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 346-352.
D’Angiulli, A., & Siegel, L. S. (2003). Cognitive functioning as
measured by the WISC-R: Do children with learning disabilities
have distinctive patterns of performance? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(1), 48-58.
Dimitrovsky, L., Spector, H., Levy-Shiff, R., & Vakil, E. ( 1998). Interpretation of facial expressions of affect in children with learning disabilities with verbal or nonverbal deficits. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 286-292, 312.
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Identifying learning disabilities with RTI. Perspectives: The International Dyslexia Association, 32(1), 39-43.
Fuerst, D. R., Fisk, J. L., & Rourke, B. P. (1990). Psychosocial functioning of learning-disabled children: Relations between WISC Verbal IQ-Performance IQ discrepancies and personality subtypes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58(5), 657-660.
Fiorello, C. A., Hale, J. B., Holdnack, J. A., Kavanagh, J. A., Terrell, J., & Long, L. (2007). Interpreting intelligence test results for children with disabilities: Is global intelligence relevant? Applied Neuropsychology, 14, 2-12.
Flanagan, D. P., & Kaufman, A. S. (2009). Essentials of WISC-IV Assessment (2nd ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.
Gross-Tsur, V., Shalev, R. S., Manor, O., & Amir, N. (1995). Developmental right hemisphere syndrome: Clinical spectrum of the nonverbal learning disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 80-86.
Hammill, D. D. (1990). On defining learning disabilities: An emerging consensus. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 74-84.
Hebben, N. (2009). Review of special group studies and utility of the process approach with the WISC-IV. In D. P. Flanagan & A. S. Kaufman (Eds.), Essentials of WISC-IV Assessment (2nd ed.) (pp. 216-242). Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.
Humphries, T., Cardy, J. O., Worling, D. E., & Peets, K. (2004). Narrative comprehension and retelling abilities of children with nonverbal learning disabilities. Brain and Cognition, 56, 77-88.
Hale, J. B., Fiorello, C. A., Miller, J. A., Wenrich, K., Teodori, A., & Henzel, J. N. (2008). WISC-IV interpretation for specific learning disabilities identification and intervention: A cognitive hypothesis testing approach. In A. Prifitera, D. H. Saklofske, & L. G. Weiss (Eds.), WISC-IV clinical assessment and intervention (2nd ed.) (pp. 109-171). New York, NY: Elsevier Science.
Harnadek, M. C. S., & Rourke, B. P. (1994). Principal identifying features of the syndrome of nonverbal learning disabilities in children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 144-154.
Johnson, D. J., & Myklebust, H. R. (1967). Learning disabilities.
New York: Grune & Stratton.
Kaufman, A. S. (1994). Intelligence testing with the WISC-III. New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Kirk, S. A., & Gallagher, J. J. (1979). Educating exceptional children (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kirk, S. A., Gallagher, J. J., Anastasiow, N. J., & Coleman, M. R.
(2006). Educating exceptional children (11th ed.). Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Keith, T. Z., Fine, J. G, Taub, G E., Reynolds, M. R., & Kranzler, J. H. (2006). Higher order, multisample, confirmatory factor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition: What does it measure? School Psychology Review, 35(1), 108-127.
Lerner, J. W., & Johns, B. (2009). Learning disabilities and related
mild disabilities: Characteristics, teaching strategies, and
new directions (11th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Liddell, G. A., & Rasmussen, C. (2005). Memory profile of children
with nonverbal learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities
Research & Practice, 20(3), 137-141.
Matte, R. R., & Bolaski, J. A. (1998). Nonverbal learning disabilities: An overview. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34(1), 39-42.
Mayes, S. D., & Calhoun, S. L. (2004). Similarties and differences in Wechsler intelligence scale for children-third edition(WISC-III) profiles: Support for subtest analysis in clinical referrals. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 18, 559-572.
Mayes, S. D., & Calhoun, S. L. (2007). Wechsler intelligence scale for children-third and -fourth edition predictors of academic achievement in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(2), 234-249.
Mayes, S. D., & Calhoun, S. L. (2008). WISC-IV and WIAT-Ⅱ profiles in children with high-functioning autism. J Autism Dev Disord, 38, 428-439.
Mayes, S. D., Calhoun, S. L. & Crowell, E. W. (1998). WISC-III profiles for children with and without learning disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 35(4), 309-316.
Ozols, E. J., & Rourke, B. P. (1988). Characteristics of young learning-disabled children classified according to patterns of academic achievement: Auditory-perceptual and visual-perceptual abilities. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 17, 44-52.
Palombo, J. (2006). Nonverbal learning disabilities: A clinical perspective. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Pelletier, P. M., Ahmad, S. A., & Rourke, B. P. (2001). Classification rules for basic phonological processing disabilities and nonverbal learning disabilities: Formulation and external validity. Child Neuropsychology, 7, 84-98.
Petti, V. L., Voelker, S. L., Shore, D. L., & Hayman-Abello, S. E.
(2003). Perception of nonverbal emotion cues by children with nonverbal learning disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 15, 23-36.
Roman, M. A. (1998). The syndrome of nonverbal learning disabilities: Clinical description and applied aspects. Current issues in education, 1(7). Retrieved November 20, 2010, from http://cie.asu.edu/volume1/number7/
Rourke, B. P. (Ed.). (1995). Syndrome of nonverbal learning learning disabilities: Neurodevelopment manifestation. New York: Guildford Press.
Rourke, B. P. (1998). Significance of verbal-perception
discrepancies for subtypes of children with learning
disabilities: Opportunities for the WISC-III. In A. Prifitera, &
D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), WISC-III clinical use and interpretation: Scientist-practitioner perspectives (pp. 139-156). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Rourke, B. P. (2005). Neuropsychology of learning disabilities: Past and future. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 28, 111-114.
Rourke , B. P., & Finlayson, M. A. J. (1978). Neuropsychological significance of variations in patterns of academic performance: Verbal and visual-spatial abilities. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 6, 121-133.
Reynolds, M. R., Keith, T. Z., Fine, J. G., Fisher, M. E., & Low, J. A. (2007). Confirmatory factor structure of the Kaufman assessment battery for children-second edition: Consistency with Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 511-539.
Rourke, B. P., & Strang, J. D. (1978). Neuropsychological significance of variations in patterns of academic performance: Motor, psychomotor, and tactile-perceptual abilities. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 3, 62-66.
Raiford, S. E., Weiss, L. G., Rolfhus, E., & Coalson, D. (2005). General Ability Index (WISC–IV Technical Report No.4). Retrieved November 20, 2010, from
http://www.pearsonassessments.com/hai/Images/pdf/wisciv/WISCIVTechReport4.pdf
Rourke, B. P., Young, G. C., & Flewelling, R. W. (1971). The relationships between WISC verbal-performance discrepancies and selected verbal, auditory-perceptual, visual-perceptual, and problem-solving abilities in children with learning disabilities.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 27, 475-479.
Rourke, B. P., Young, G. C., & Leenaars, A. A. (1989). A childhood learning disability that predisposes those afflicted to adolescent and adult depression and suicide risk. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 169-175.
Slate, J. R. (1995). Discrepancies between IQ and index scores for a
clinical sample of students: Useful diagnostic indicators? Psychology in the Schools, 32, 103-108.
Sattler, J. M., Dumont, R., & Rapport, L. J. (2008). Interpreting the
WISC-IV. In J. M. Sattler (Ed.), Assessment of children:
Cognitive foundations (5th ed.) (pp. 364-402). San Diego, CA:
Jerome M. Sattler.
Semrud-Clikeman, M. & Glass, K. (2008). Comprehension of humor in children with nonverbal learning disabilities, reading disabilities, and without learning disabilities. Annals of Dyslexia, 58, 163-180.
Strang, J. D., & Rourke, B. P. (1983). Concept-formation/non-verbal reasoning abilities of children who exhibit specific academic problems with arithmetic. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 12, 33-39.
Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (1988). Attention deficit disorder: Current perspectives. In J. F. Kavanaugh & T. J. Truss (Eds.), Learning disabilities: Proceedings of the National Conference (pp. 369-523). Parkton, MD: York Press.
Thompson, S. (1997). Nonverbal learning disabilities. Retrieved November 20, 2010, from http://www.nldline.com/
Tanguay, P. B. (2002). Nonverbal learning disabilities at school: Educating students with NLD, Asperger’s syndrome and related conditions. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Telzrow, C. F., & Bonar, A. M. (2002). Responding to students with
nonverbal learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34, 8-13.
Tuller, B., Jantzen, K. J., Olvera, D., Steinberg, F., & Kelso, J. A. S. (2007). The influence of instruction modality on brain activation in teenagers with nonverbal learning disabilities: Two case histories. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(4), 348-359.
U.S. Department of Education (2010). 29th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2007 Vol. 1. Retrieved December 31, 2010, from http://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2007/parts-b-c/29th-vol-1.pdf
U.S. Department of Education (2011). RTI/EIS（Leadership 2006）. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cdynamic%2CPresentation%2C16%2C
Vogel, S. A. (1990). Gender differences in intelligence, language,
visual-motor abilities, and academic achievement in students
with learning disabilities: A review of the literature. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 23, 44-52.
Vacca, D. M. (2001). Confronting the puzzle of nonverbal learining disabilities. Educational Leadership, 59(3), 26-31.
Watkins, M. W. (1996). Diagnositc utility of the WISC-III
developmental index as a predictor of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 305-312.
Wechsler, D. (2003). WISC-IV technical and interpretive manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Watkins, M. W., Glutting, J. J., & Lei, P. (2007). Validity of the full scale IQ when there is significant variability among WISC-III and WISC-IV factor scores. Applied Neuropsychology, 14, 13-20.
Worling, D. E., Humphries, T., & Tannock, R. (1999). Spatial and emotional aspects of language inferencing in nonverbal learning disabilities. Brain and language, 70, 220-239.
Watkins, M. W., Kush, J. S., & Schaefer, B. A. (2002). Diagnostic utility of Learning Disability Index. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 103-136.
Weiss, L. G., Prifitera, A., Holdnack, J. A., Saklofske, D. H., Rolfhus, E., & Coalson, D. (2006). The essentials and beyond. In L. G. Weiss, D. H. Saklofske, A. Prifitera, & J. A. Holdnack (Eds.), WISC-IV advanced clinical interpretation (pp. 59-97). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Weiss, L. G., Saklofske, D. H., Schwartz, D. M., Prifitera, A., & Courville, T. (2006). Advanced clinical interpretation of WISC–IV index scores. In L. G. Weiss, D. H. Saklofske, A. Prifitera, & J. A. Holdnack (Eds.), WISC-IV advanced clinical interpretation (pp. 139-179). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Williams, P. E., Weiss, L. G., & Rolfhus, E. (2003). Theoretical model and test blueprint (WISC–IV Technical Report No.1). Retrieved November 20, 2010, from
http://www.pearsonpsychcorp.com.au/userfiles/TechReport1WISCIVModel.pdf