Running Head: QUANTITATIVE ARTICLE CRITIQUE #1

Quantitative Research Article Critique #1

Alison Lessard
University of Calgary
EDPS 612.01

QUANTITATIVE ARTICLE CRITIQUE #1

Quantitative Research Article Critique #1

This paper is a critical review of the article titled, Colored Overlays Do Not Alleviate
Reading Difficulties (Ritchie, Della Salla, & MacIntosh, 2011). The article describes a research
study performed to determine the short-term effectiveness of colored overlays in a sample of
children who had been diagnosed with reading difficulties associated with Irlen syndrome.
Research Purpose and Hypothesis
Irlen Syndrome also known as visual stress, Meares-Irlen Syndrome, and Scotopic
Sensitivity Syndrome is a hypothesized perceptual disorder characterized by visual distortions
and illusions when reading which interferes with an individuals ability identify and decode
words. Plastic colored overlays are proposed to support symptoms of Irlen syndrome, primarily
the visual distortions that interfere with reading. Colored overlays are believed by Irlen
Syndrome advocates to minimize visual distortions resulting in improved reading rate and
reading skills long term.
Ritchie, Della Salla, and MacIntosh (2011) stated Irlen Syndrome has a controversial
diagnostic status with an existing lack of reliable evidence regarding colored overlays. A recent
increase in widespread use of overlays paired with an insufficient evidence base was a cause for
concern. Prior studies according to Ritchie et al. (2011) involved methodological issues
including small sample sizes, pre-selection of study participants, and inadequate statistical
analysis. The stated the purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of colored overlays to
alleviate reading difficulties caused by Irlen Syndrome under more rigorous conditions (Ritchie
et al., 2011).

QUANTITATIVE ARTICLE CRITIQUE #1

Participants
The sample consisted of 61 children from Newark Primary School in Port Glasgow,
Scotland, aged 7-12 (mean 9.54 years). This study included a non-randomized sample as
participants had been pre-selected by classroom teachers to be assessed by an Irlen diagnostician
because of reading difficulties. Consent was received from parents, and the study was approved
by the ethics panel from the department of psychology at Edinburgh University.
Methods: Measures and Procedures
Both colored overlay assessments and reading tests were used as measures in this study.
The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), typically used as a test for dementia in older
patients has validity to assess general cognitive ability in children was chosen because of its brief
administration time. The Wilkins Rate of Reading Test (WRRT) includes 15 sight words on 10
lines. Administration time is 60 seconds and miscues are recorded. In addition, the Gray Oral
Reading Test, 4th edition (GORT) provided a measure of global reading ability regarding fluency,
comprehension, as well as an oral reading quotient. An Irlen Syndrome diagnostician completed
assessment with each participant that included counting symbols within pictures and observing
text through colored overlays and responding to questions regarding visual discomfort and
distortions. Typically, an Irlen specialist prescribes a specific color at the end of the assessment
if a child meets criteria for the syndrome, but for the purposes of this study results were masked.
After the assessment participants were assigned to a group, the Irlen group included students
who were diagnosed with Irlen Syndrome (n=44), and the non-Irlen group (n=17), those who did
not meet criteria for the syndrome. Both between-group and within-subject study designs were
used. The between-group design consisted of assessing reading rate of all participants across
three conditions: using an overlay of prescribed color, an overlay of a non-prescribed color, and

QUANTITATIVE ARTICLE CRITIQUE #1

using an overlay with no color. The within-subject study consisted of the group of 44 children
identified as having an Irlen diagnosis. The global reading ability of each of the participants in
this group was assessed using the GORT and colored overlays. In addition, a masked evaluation
of all childrens vision was conducted by an orthoptist to test acuity and eye motor function. A
double blind condition also existed during assessment as neither the participant nor the assessor
using the WRRT and the GORT knew the outcome of Irlen diagnostic assessment.
Results and Conclusions
The effect of overlays of the within-subject design resulted in no significant difference in
reading rate for any of the participants. For the 44 participants in the Irlen group, the withingroup design results also showed no significant difference in GORT scores using colored
overlays. As a result of their study, the authors suggested parents, schools, and health care
professionals proceed with care surrounding Irlen syndrome prior to spending resources on
treatment.
Strengths and Limitations
Ritchie, Della Sala, and MacIntosh (2011) provided a clear, non-biased study of one
aspect of this controversial disorder, the use of colored overlays to improve reading rate and
skills. Some of the strengths of this study included using both within-subject and within-group
designs as it allowed comparison of the results in multiple ways. Also, a double blind design
existed for both the participants and assessors including the orthoptist. Ethically there were no
concerns regarding this study. An Irlen diagnostician was included in the study, which allowed
for both sides of the study to be represented. Limitations of this study include a small sample
size where all of the participants were from the same school and area, and all were referred
because of reading difficulties. No formal assessment had been conducted on the participants to

QUANTITATIVE ARTICLE CRITIQUE #1

determine the presence or absence of a reading disorder. In addition, this study did not address
the existence of Irlen Syndrome as a diagnosable disorder. Despite these limitations, overall the
study was appropriately designed and provided a non-biased study of colored overlays and their
effect on reading.

References

QUANTITATIVE ARTICLE CRITIQUE #1

Ritchie, S. J., Della Sala, S., & McIntosh, R. D. (2011). Irlen colored overlays
do not alleviate reading difficulties. Pediatrics, 128(4), e932.
doi:10.1542/peds.2011-0314.