Characterization of gaze in handwriting of High and Low Frequency Word of Schoolchildren with Dyslexia

Writing is extremely important for our academic and professional life and can affect our performance in productive educational activities, favouring us or not. Schoolchildren with dyslexia bring difficulties and reduced school performance due to their condition of deprivation in written production. This is because schoolchildren with dyslexia have difficulty acquiring spelling knowledge and show poor phonological skills. This study aimed to characterize the performance of schoolchildren with dyslexia in “gaze” for the handwriting of High and Low-frequency words. A total of 24 schoolchildren participated in the study. They were between 8 to 11 years and 11 months of age, of both sexes, and they were attending the 3rd to the 5th year of Elementary School in the city of Marília-SP. The schoolchildren were divided into groups: GI, composed of 12schoolchildren with an interdisciplinary diagnosis of developmental dyslexia, and GII, composed of 12 schoolchildren with good academic performance, paired with GI according to the school grade level. These schoolchildren were submitted to computerized handwriting evaluation using a Brazilian adaptation of the Software Ductus. All schoolchildren were submitted to a copy of words already selected according to Brazilian Portuguese criteria of frequency and codification rule. A measure of “gaze” was used, that is, when the schoolchildren stopped their handwriting to search/look up at the screen to confirm the information about the words. The results indicated a significant difference between GI and GII, with GI schoolchildren performing more gaze when compared with GII, i.e., taking longer motor breaks to perform the gaze. Therefore, there was a rupture in the central processing with the peripheral when the child performed the gauze more times since he had to confirm the characteristics of this word during the writing process (difficulty in accessing the orthographic lexicon) and with that, there was a break in the movement of handwriting (since there was not enough information in the central plane to complete that motor memory and finish the word). It was concluded that there were gaps between the central (orthographic) and peripheral (motor pauses processes, suggesting deficits in the formation of motor programs for GI and the lack of automation of motor processes