{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02901023890784983, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015358361774744027, 'mean_word_length': 5.259786476868327, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Futile Search for a Theory of Learning Disabilities

S has written a provocative paper that raises important issues for both the researcher and practitioner. It would be hard to argue with the basic assumptions on which the paper is built—specifically, that theoretical models provide a framework for the conduct of basic research, and that basic research is the vehicle through which we test and verify our theories. In this case, we are concerned with theories that will help us understand learning disabilities, and Swanson suggests that our understanding has been limited by a variety of factors, some quite political, that have prevented both basic research and theory development. As I prepared this commentary, I read Swanson's paper in the context of other articles related to theory development in the learning disabilities (LD) field (see, e.g., Swanson, 1987a, 1987b; Torgesen, 1986; Wong, 1979a, 1979b). In a particularly lucid paper, Torgesen (1986) clarifies the distinctions between paradigms and theories: " While a paradigm involves a general orientation to an area of inquiry, theories attempt to provide specific explanations for particular phenomena within the general bounds set by the paradigm" (p. 400). Torgesen suggests that it is possible to have competing theories about the same phenomena within a single paradigm, and he reviews the three paradigms from which most of the research and theory in the LD field emanate. His review includes the information processing, neuropsychological, and applied behavioral analysis paradigms. In reviewing Swanson's paper, "Toward a Metatheory of Learning Disabilities," it helps to understand at the outset that Swanson has adopted an information processing paradigm and that he is, conse-