Robin van Rijthoven

18 Chapter 1 so far did not incorporate all three errors types (phonological, morphological, and orthographic errors) in one study in order to compare phonological and orthographic processes in spelling with one another. As known fromprevious studies, not all childrenwith dyslexia benefit from interventions to the same extent, and individual differences in responsiveness have been reported repeatedly (see, e.g., Galuschka et al., 2014; Singleton, 2009; Snowling & Hayiou-Thomas, 2006; Torgesen, 2006). In order to gain insight in which children benefit from certain interventions it is necessary to match profiles of relative strengths and weaknesses with specific intervention approaches (see also Burns et al., 2016). These profiles could include phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, verbal working memory, semantic abilities, verbal learning, and verbal consolidation. Currently, research including effects all of the aforementioned predictors on response to phonics through spelling intervention (with time evenly spent on reading and spelling) in children with dyslexia is missing. Strengths in semantic representations or the ability to expand these could, as mentioned earlier, be sources of compensation for both reading and spelling. Furthermore, regarding individual spelling profiles of children with dyslexia, results of phonics interventions on spelling have only been expressed in the number of words written correctly, whereas comparing spelling error profiles before and after the intervention could give new insights in the phonological and orthographic processes in spelling development among children with dyslexia due to the intervention. It can thus be concluded that weak phonological abilities in children with dyslexia can be compensated by enhancing the orthographic representations and its connections with the phonological part of the recurrent network. However, more in-depth knowledge is needed regarding the spelling profiles of children with dyslexia to determine what effects phonics through spelling interventions have on spelling development of children with dyslexia. Moreover, most intervention studies regarding children with dyslexia have focused on reading or spelling whereas both processes can enhance the quality of the bidirectional relations betweenphonological and orthographic representations andbenefit each other as well. Phonics through spelling interventions (i.e., interventions in which at least 50% of the time is spent on spelling activities) could have many beneficial effects but research regarding this specific type of intervention is scarce and have not yet been related to relevant cognitive precursors (i.e., phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, working memory, semantic abilities, and verbal learning and consolidation). Present research The present research focused on compensating reading and spelling in children with dyslexia in the Netherlands. The first goal was to examine the compensatory role of