Reply to Stuart and Lovegrove's question, "visual processing deficits in dyslexia: receptors or neural mechanisms?".

Recently Stuart and Lovegrove questioned the receptor hypothesis of Grosser and Spafford which these authors used to account for the findings that dyslexic individuals have superior peripheral color discrimination to normal readers but also have poorer peripheral brightness discrimination than normal readers. Stuart and Lovegrove hypothesized that dyslexics instead have an impaired transient visual system. The receptor hypothesis is an attempt by Grosser and Spafford to link the functioning of the rods and cones to transient and sustained visual system functioning in a more specific manner than has been tried heretofore by suggesting that, while the parvocellular system is almost entirely fed by cones, both kinds of receptors drive magnocellular cells (but with the rapid onset of early transient system responding being due to the highly light sensitive rods). The rods are proposed to be the receptors initiating the rapid onset of responding in the magnocellular, transient pathway. In dyslexic individuals, they maintain, there are relatively fewer rods to provide for the rapid onset of transient system responses, resulting in a diminished capacity of the transient system to inhibit sustained system activity (as occurs with normal readers). Their receptor hypothesis supplements the concept of transient-vs-sustained system differences.     

Short-term memory limitations in children: Capacity or processing deficits?

This paper evaluates the assertion that short-term memory (STM) capacity increases with age. Initially an analysis is made of the STM system in terms of its parameters and control processes. No evidence was found that can suggest conclusively that either the capacity or the rate of information loss from STM varies with age. On the other hand, substantial evidence exists to show that the processing strategies used by adults are unavailable or deficient in children. Furthermore, considerable differences in the contents and complexity of the long-term memory (LTM) knowledge base (semantic and recognition networks can produce grossly different STM performance between age groups. The second half of this paper reviews three STM-related paradigms-memory span, serial probed recall, and recognition under limited exposure-that have consistently shown performance deficits in children. These deficits are explained in terms of the lack of proper control processes (or processing strategies), as well as an impoverished LTM knowledge base rather than a limitation in STM capacity.     

Visual temporal processing in dyslexia and the magnocellular deficit theory: the need for speed?

A controversial question in reading research is whether dyslexia is associated with impairments in the magnocellular system and, if so, how these low-level visual impairments might affect reading acquisition. This study used a novel chromatic flicker perception task to specifically explore temporal aspects of magnocellular functioning in 40 children with dyslexia and 42 age-matched controls (aged 7-11). The relationship between magnocellular temporal resolution and higher-level aspects of visual temporal processing including inspection time, single and dual-target (attentional blink) RSVP performance, go/no-go reaction time, and rapid naming was also assessed. The Dyslexia group exhibited significant deficits in magnocellular temporal resolution compared with controls, but the two groups did not differ in parvocellular temporal resolution. Despite the significant group differences, associations between magnocellular temporal resolution and reading ability were relatively weak, and links between low-level temporal resolution and reading ability did not appear specific to the magnocellular system. Factor analyses revealed that a collective Perceptual Speed factor, involving both low-level and higher-level visual temporal processing measures, accounted for unique variance in reading ability independently of phonological processing, rapid naming, and general ability.     

Developmental dyslexia in different languages: language-specific or universal?

Most of the research on developmental dyslexia comes from English-speaking countries. However, there is accumulating evidence that learning to read English is harder than learning to read other European orthographies (Seymour, Aro, & Erskine, 2003). These findings therefore suggest the need to determine whether the main English findings concerning dyslexia can be generalized to other European orthographies, all of which have less irregular spelling-to-sound correspondences than English. To do this, we conducted a study with German- and English-speaking children (n=149) in which we investigated a number of theoretically important marker effects of the reading process. The results clearly show that the similarities between dyslexic readers using different orthographies are far bigger than their differences. That is, dyslexics in both countries exhibit a reading speed deficit, a nonword reading deficit that is greater than their word reading deficit, and an extremely slow and serial phonological decoding mechanism. These problems were of similar size across orthographies and persisted even with respect to younger readers that were at the same reading level. Both groups showed that they could process larger orthographic units. However, the use of this information to supplement grapheme-phoneme decoding was not fully efficient for the English dyslexics.     

Mental imagery and dyslexia: a deficit in processing multipart visual objects?

Dyslexic and normal control subjects memorized simple line patterns inside a grid and subsequently judged whether an "X" would have fallen on the pattern had it been present in an empty grid. The patterns were letters and novel shapes. The grids were presented to the left visual field, to the right visual field, or in central vision. Dyslexic subjects had difficulty generating images of multipart patterns, but this deficit was limited to letters. The findings suggest that dyslexics may have selective difficulty integrating visual information stored in long-term memory.     

What is the deficit in phonological processing deficits: auditory sensitivity, masking, or category formation?

Although children with language impairments, including those associated with reading, usually demonstrate deficits in phonological processing, there is minimal agreement as to the source of those deficits. This study examined two problems hypothesized to be possible sources: either poor auditory sensitivity to speech-relevant acoustic properties, mainly formant transitions, or enhanced masking of those properties. Adults and 8-year-olds with and without phonological processing deficits (PPD) participated. Children with PPD demonstrated weaker abilities than children with typical language development (TLD) in reading, sentence recall, and phonological awareness. Dependent measures were word recognition, discrimination of spectral glides, and phonetic judgments based on spectral and temporal cues. All tasks were conducted in quiet and in noise. Children with PPD showed neither poorer auditory sensitivity nor greater masking than adults and children with TLD, but they did demonstrate an unanticipated deficit in category formation for nonspeech sounds. These results suggest that these children may have an underlying deficit in perceptually organizing sensory information to form coherent categories.     

Dyslexia: sensory deficits or inattention?

An important question in regard to dyslexia is whether or not this condition is the result of sensory deficits. A number of studies have indeed found sensory deficiencies in dyslexic readers. However, it has been proposed that these are due simply to inattention. If so, this would be expected to produce either (i) a general reduction or (ii) random reductions in performance. On the basis of published data, it seems that neither of these is in fact the case. Rather the data indicate reproducible non-random patterns of deficiencies with regard to stimulus conditions. The stimulus specificity of the deficits represents, therefore, an important issue which needs to be addressed by any attempt to account for the sensory deficiencies of dyslexic readers in terms of inattention.     

Order or disorder? Impaired Hebb learning in dyslexia

The present study offers an integrative account proposing that dyslexia and its various associated cognitive impairments reflect an underlying deficit in the long-term learning of serial-order information, here operationalized as Hebb repetition learning. In nondyslexic individuals, improved immediate serial recall is typically observed when one particular sequence of items is repeated across an experimental session, a phenomenon known as the Hebb repetition effect. Starting from the critical observation that individuals with dyslexia seem to be selectively impaired in cognitive tasks that involve processing of serial order, the present study is the first to test and confirm the hypothesis that the Hebb repetition effect is affected in dyslexia, even for nonverbal modalities. We present a theoretical framework in which the Hebb repetition effect is assumed to be a laboratory analogue of naturalistic word learning, on the basis of which we argue that dyslexia is characterized by an impairment of serial-order learning that affects language learning and processing.     

Preattentive processing or prefocal processing?

The concept of preattentive processing is analyzed and alternative views of it are presented. A basic question is whether processing required for preattentive input selection is qualitatively different from post-selection processing. In order to study this, subjects were presented in one set of conditions with one stimulus at either of two locations, and in another set of conditions, simultaneously with two stimuli. The stimuli could be green or red, or large or small. Subjects were asked to indicate the location (or the color, or the size) of the single stimulus in the single-stimulus conditions, or of a predesignated stimulus (say, the red one) in the dual-stimulus conditions. Responses were generally slower in the dual-stimulus conditions. The increases in reaction time were accounted for by the times it takes to process for response selection the properties by which the target stimulus could be selected, as indicated by the results of two control conditions. The results as well as some other considerations do not support the view that preattentive processing is necessarily of a type that qualitatively differs from post-selection processing.     

Inhibitory deficits in trait anxiety: Increased stimulus-based or response-based interference?

Trait anxiety is associated with an impaired ability to inhibit task-irrelevant distractions. However, distractions may cause conflict at multiple stages within the information-processing stream, which may be resolved by different subsystems, depending on the type of conflict. Here, we contrasted two forms of conflict that have been distinguished in the literature: stimulus–stimulus (SS) versus stimulus–response (SR) competition. Across two experiments, participants completed a Stroop-like task that included distractor color words that could be either a different color promoting the same response as the target (SS interference) or a different color promoting a different response (SR interference). In line with previous studies, anxiety increased overall task-irrelevant distraction, measured by incongruent versus congruent reaction times. Importantly, this increase was driven solely by SR conflict, with no evidence of group differences in SS interference, despite clear within-subjects costs. These results clarify that trait anxiety may modulate inhibitory responses primarily by disrupting the resolution of response competition, while having little effect on stimulus conflict. Additionally, the results highlight the utility of distinguishing forms of conflict resolution, particularly in individual-difference approaches in which inhibition is impaired in a variety of clinical and nonclinical populations.     

Visual discrimination deficits of reading-disabled children: Sex artifact?

Several theorists have suggested that deficits in visual discrimination play an etiological role in the development of reading deficits in children who are diagnosed as learning-disabled. Supporting this theory, a number of studies have shown that disabled readers make more errors on visual discrimination tasks than do good readers. The present study, however, suggests that those findings may have been due to a sex-difference artifact. Thirty-six 8- and 9-year-old good readers and reading-disabled children of both sexes responded to 40 matching items under untimed conditions. Males made more errors than females, but overall, reading-disabled children made no more errors than good readers. These findings, along with a reanalysis of previous studies, suggest that because reading disabilities are more common in males, evidence construed as supporting a visual discrimination hypothesis may have been an artifact of a sex difference in studies in which sex was not controlled.     

Specific language impairment: a deficit in grammar or processing?

Specific Language Impairment (SLI) is observed in children who fail to acquire age-appropriate language skills but otherwise appear to be developing normally. There are two main hypotheses about the nature of these impairments. One assumes that they reflect impairments in the child's innate knowledge of grammar. The other is that they derive from information-processing deficits that interfere with several aspects of language learning. There is considerable evidence that SLI is associated with impaired speech processing; however, the link between this deficit and the kinds of grammatical impairments observed in these children has been unclear. We suggest that the link is provided by phonology, a speech-based code that plays important roles in learning linguistic generalizations and in working memory.     

Summation in causal learning: elemental processing or configural generalization?

Results from human causal learning tasks that employ multiple cues are often interpreted in terms of the elemental theory of Rescorla and Wagner (1972). However, most results can also be successfully interpreted by the configural model proposed by Pearce (1987, 1994). One method of discriminating between these alternatives is through an investigation of summation and overexpectation. Indeed, demonstrations of these phenomena are fundamental to an elemental approach but are generally incompatible with an account that involves configural processing. Using a procedure in which the magnitude of the outcome varied, evidence for both summation and overexpectation was obtained in two experiments.     

Lexical decision in children: sublexical processing or lexical search?

Length effects in the lexical decision latencies of children might indicate that children rely on sublexical processing and essentially approach the task as a naming task. We examined this possibility by means of the effects of neighbourhood size and articulatory suppression on lexical decision performance. Sixty-six beginning and 62 advanced readers performed a lexical decision task in a standard, articulatory suppression, or tapping condition. We found length effects on words and nonwords in the children's lexical decisions. However, the effects of neighbourhood size were similar to those reported for adult lexical decisions, rather than the effects previously found in children's naming. In addition, no effect was found of articulatory suppression. Both findings suggest that, despite clear length effects, children do not adopt a naming task approach but, like adults, base lexical decisions mainly on a lexical search. These results pose a challenge for several computational models of reading.     

Spatial frequency processing in schizophrenia: trait or state marker?

B. F. O'Donnell et al. found impaired discrimination performances at low and medium spatial frequencies in patients with schizophrenia. In this study, the authors replicated this finding in a group of remitted, unmedicated, and highly functioning outpatients with spared IQ and attentional functions. However, the deficit was restricted to low spatial frequencies (0.5 cycles/degree), which suggests that this deficit is a trait marker of schizophrenia.     

Do dyslexia and stuttering share a processing deficit?

This study assessed the prevalence of childhood stuttering in adults with dyslexia (AWD) and the prevalence of dyslexia in adults who stutter (AWS). In addition, the linguistic profiles of 50 AWD, 30 AWS and 84 neurotypical adults were measured. We found that 17 out of 50 AWD (34 %) reported stuttering during childhood compared to 1 % of the neurotypical population. This was moderated by the severity of dyslexia: People with mild dyslexia showed a lower prevalence rate (15 %) of childhood stuttering than those with severe dyslexia (47 %). In addition, we observed that 50 % of the AWS (n = 30) fulfilled the diagnostic criteria of dyslexia, even though they had never been diagnosed as dyslexic. Compared to neurotypical adults, phonological working memory, awareness, and retrieval were similarly reduced in AWS and AWD. The findings supports the view that stuttering and dyslexia may share a phonological deficit.     

Summation in causal learning: Elemental processing or configural generalization?

Results from human causal learning tasks that employ multiple cues are often interpreted in terms of the elemental theory of Rescorla and Wagner (1972). However, most results can also be successfully interpreted by the configural model proposed by Pearce (1987, 1994). One method of discriminating between these alternatives is through an investigation of summation and overexpectation. Indeed, demonstrations of these phenomena are fundamental to an elemental approach but are generally incompatible with an account that involves configural processing. Using a procedure in which the magnitude of the outcome varied, evidence for both summation and overexpectation was obtained in two experiments.     

Can a temporal processing deficit account for dyslexia?

In this comment, we argue that although Farmer and Klein (1995) have provided a valuable review relating deficits in nonreading tasks and dyslexia, their basic claim that a “temporal processing deficit” is one possible cause of dyslexia is somewhat vague. We argue that “temporal processing deficit” is never clearly defined. Furthermore, we question some of their assumptions concerning an auditory temporal processing deficit related to dyslexia, and we present arguments and data that seem inconsistent with their claims regarding how a visual temporal processing deficit would manifest itself in dyslexic readers. While we agree that some dyslexics have visual problems, we conclude that problems with reading caused by the visual mechanisms that Farmer and Klein postulate are quite rare.     

Deep dyslexia in childhood?

Deep dyslexia is an acquired reading disorder in which semantic substitutions (e.g., city read as town) are made in reading single isolated words. In this paper, evidence for deep dyslexic-type errors is presented from the word-recognition responses of six children, aged 7 years and 0 month to 8 years and 9 months, with severe reading disorders. These semantic substitutions occur in the absence of phonological skills. Therefore, it appears that there exists a small subset of developmental dyslexics who at the beginning of acquisition of reading skills are able to engage in semantic processing, but who show severe impairment of phonological processing. The existence of these reading errors indicate that the use of a phonological code is not necessary to extract meaning from the printed word.