In case you missed it (I did), the Dore program was embroiled in a bit more controvery in the winter of 2007, enough to merit an editorial in Nature Neuorscience. The editorial recounts the resignation of members of the professional editorial board of Dyslexia over publication of two studies of the Dore treatment, points out problems of potential conflict of interest, describes the theory and practice of the Dore program, reports the two studies that form the base for the controversy, and recounts selected aspects of the scholaraly criticisms of the studies. The spoon that stirs the controversy, however, is that non-scientific factors are interferring with orderly analysis. According to Nature Neuorscience, at least two people who have said that the scientific evidence for the program’s effectiveness is weak have been subjected to legal pressure to withdraw their criticisms.
Nature Neuorscience goes on to indicate that questions about the usefulness of any treatment should be determined in an orderly scientific manner, not as a consequence of political or other unfalsifiable methods. If decisions are based on commerical or legal interests, consumers will not be able to depend on researchers for honest opinions.
Nature Neuroscience, by the way, is a relatively new journal (it’s only 10 years old) that rose rapidly to the top echelon of scholarly publications in neurosciences. It routinely ranks in the top five among its peers for its “impact factor,” a measure reflecting the relative frequency articles published in a particular journal are cited by in other publications.
Link to the editorial (access probably costs unless you’re hitting it from a university that has rights to it). Links to previous posts on LD Blog are here and here. Also see the many entries Liz Ditz has on this subject.
Sphere: Related Content
A copy of the Editorial is available for free here: http://npg.nature.com/neuro/journal/v10/n2/full/nn0207-135.html
This controversy focuses on two key issues:
- Are Dore’s studies valid science?
- Was the resignation of the five scientists from Dyslexia’s board a genuine act of selfless protest or was it a stunt by a group with their own agenda?
On the first point, all articles in Dyslexia are independently peer-reviewed, the gold standard in scientific research. Clearly the peer reviewers in this case felt that the paper was worthy of publication and their decision should be respected.
Why did the five scientist resign? Was it protest or stunt? Its worth noting that the five who resigned where out of a panel of about 20 highly respected scientists. If Dore’s paper was so bad, why didn’t the entire board resign? Or could it be that the five had their own agenda? (See here for the current editorial board: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jabout/6124/EditorialBoard.html )
The five who resigned claim that it was over the conflict of interest in the report, e.g. that the lead researcher had been paid by Dore. Such a conflict of interest is not good in a study but there are a few fact worth considering.
- No one else is studying Dore’s treatment. How can a commercial company generate scientific data without paying (directly or indirectly) the researchers? I’m sure Wynford Dore would be delighted to have a truely independent study done.
- Prof Snowling who was the ringleader amongst the five who resigned is a longtime critic of Dore and has appeared in several national newspapers criticising Dore for its commercial nature and lack of science.
- Prof Snowling is involved with Dyslexia Action, a psuedo-commercial organisation that generate £8 million a year selling after schools help to dyslexics. It is a direct competitor to Dore and has never published any research on its effectiveness in the 23 years of the organisation’s existence. Get the real story on Dyslexia Action here: http://www.myomancy.com/2007/02/who_are_dyslexi
There are many good scientific reasons for criticising Dore’s research and more independent research needs to be done but this is how science makes progress. However Prof Snowling and her cronies are not interest in science. They prefer to spend there time performing attention seeking stunts in an attempt to discredit Dore.
For more on Dore: http://www.myomancy.com/category/dore-achievement-centres/