Some remarks on the use of motion VEPs to assess magnocellular sensitivity

The visual basis of reading and reading difficulties

Most of our knowledge about the neural networks mediating reading has derived from studies of developmental dyslexia (DD). For much of the 20th C. this was diagnosed on the basis of finding a discrepancy between children's unexpectedly low reading and spelling scores compared with their normal or high oral and non-verbal reasoning ability. This discrepancy criterion has now been replaced by the claim that the main feature of dyslexia is a phonological deficit, and it is now argued that we should test for this to identify dyslexia. However, grasping the phonological principle is essential for all learning to read; so every poor reader will show a phonological deficit. The phonological theory does not explain why dyslexic people, in particular, fail; so this phonological criterion makes it impossible to distinguish DD from any of the many other causes of reading failure. Currently therefore, there is no agreement about precisely how we should identify it. Yet, if we understood the specific neural pathways that underlie failure to acquire phonological skills specifically in people with dyslexia, we should be able to develop reliable means of identifying it. An important, though not the only, cause in people with dyslexia is impaired development of the brain's rapid visual temporal processing systems; these are required for sequencing the order of the letters in a word accurately. Such temporal, "transient," processing is carried out primarily by a distinct set of "magnocellular" (M-) neurones in the visual system; and the development of these has been found to be impaired in many people with dyslexia. Likewise, auditory sequencing of the sounds in a word is mediated by the auditory temporal processing system whose development is impaired in many dyslexics. Together these two deficits can therefore explain their problems with acquiring the phonological principle. Assessing poor readers' visual and auditory temporal processing skills should enable dyslexia to be reliably distinguished from other causes of reading failure and this will suggest principled ways of helping these children to learn to read, such as sensory training, yellow or blue filters or omega 3 fatty acid supplements. This will enable us to diagnose DD with confidence, and thus to develop educational plans targeted to exploit each individual child's strengths and compensate for his weaknesses.

Global motion evoked potentials in autistic and dyslexic children: A cross-syndrome approach

Atypicalities in psychophysical thresholds for global motion processing have been reported in many neurodevelopmental conditions, including autism and dyslexia. Cross-syndrome comparisons of neural dynamics may help determine whether altered motion processing is a general marker of atypical development or condition-specific. Here, we assessed group differences in N2 peak amplitude (previously proposed as a marker of motion-specific processing) in typically developing (n = 57), autistic (n = 29) and dyslexic children (n = 44) aged 6-14 years, in two global motion tasks. High-density EEG data were collected while children judged the direction of global motion stimuli as quickly and accurately as possible, following a period of random motion. Using a data-driven component decomposition technique, we identified a reliable component that was maximal over occipital electrodes and had an N2-like peak at ~160 msec. We found no group differences in N2 peak amplitude, in either task. However, for both autistic and dyslexic children, there was evidence of atypicalities in later stages of processing that require follow up in future research. Our results suggest that early sensory encoding of motion information is unimpaired in dyslexic and autistic children. Group differences in later processing stages could reflect sustained global motion responses, decision-making, metacognitive processes and/or response generation, which may also distinguish between autistic and dyslexic individuals.

A few remarks on relating reaction time to magnocellular activity

Studies have found dyslexic readers to have longer reaction times than nondyslexic readers. These results have been discussed relative to the hypothesis that dyslexia is caused by a magnocellular deficit. We here point out that attempts to link reaction times in dyslexic readers to magnocellular sensitivity face at least two serious problems: (a) The reaction time differences between dyslexics and controls appear too large to be attributable to deficits in the magnocellular system; (b) there is evidence to suggest that in the case of stimuli with contrast above about 10% behavioral reaction times may reflect parvocellular rather than magnocellular activity.

Contrast sensitivity and magnocellular functioning in schizophrenia

It has been suggested that schizophrenia is associated with a magnocellular deficit. This would predict a loss of contrast sensitivity at low spatial and/or at high temporal frequencies. We here review research that tested contrast sensitivity in individuals with schizophrenia. We find that the results of this research tend to show uniform reductions in contrast sensitivity that are generally not consistent with a magnocellular deficit. While much of this data may be consistent with an attentional deficiency on the part of the schizophrenic individuals, it is difficult to link such an attentional deficiency specifically to the magnocellular system. The conclusion of the present review is that contrast sensitivity data do not indicate the existence of an association between magnocellular deficits and schizophrenia.

Yellow filters, magnocellular responses, and reading

It has been suggested that yellow filters may increase magnocellular responsivity. This suggestion was, in large part, based on the assumption that the S-cones inhibit the magnocellular system. However, the evidence invoked to justify this assumption is only indirect. A previously reported direct electrophysiological investigation of this issue has found that S-cone input to the magnocellular system actually sum with L-and M-cone inputs. Therefore, the notion that yellow filters enhance magnocellular responses by reducing inhibition from S-cones cannot be maintained.

A primer on motion visual evoked potentials

Motion visual evoked potentials (motion VEPs) have been used since the late 1960s to investigate the properties of human visual motion processing, and continue to be a popular tool with a possible future in clinical diagnosis. This review first provides a synopsis of the characteristics of motion VEPs and then summarizes important methodological aspects. A subsequent overview illustrates how motion VEPs have been applied to study basic functions of human motion processing and shows perspectives for their use as a diagnostic tool.

Attention, dyslexia, and the line-motion illusion

Dyslexic readers have been found to have a reduced line-motion illusion. This has been interpreted as evidence for an attention deficit of magnocellular origin. We show that this interpretation has severe problems: 1) to link reduced line-motion illusion to attention overlooks other factors, 2) to link the line-motion illusion specifically to the magnocellular system is problematic because the illusion can be obtained with isoluminant stimuli, 3) reduced illusory motion in dyslexic individuals may reflect sensory deficits, and 4) to link dyslexia specifically to the magnocellular system is in general problematic.

Motion-onset VEPs: Characteristics, methods, and diagnostic use

This review article summarises the research on the motion-onset visual evoked potentials (VEPs) and important motion stimulus parameters which have been clarified. For activation of the visual motion processing system and evocation of the motion-onset specific N2 peak (with latency of 160-200ms) from the extra-striate temporo-occipital and/or parietal cortex, the following stimulus parameters can be recently recommended: low luminance (<ca. 20cd/m(2)) and low contrast (<ca. 10%-sinusoidally modulated) of a moving structure with low velocity and temporal frequency (<ca. 6Hz). A short (up to 200ms) duration of motion and a long (at least 1s) inter-stimulus interval reduce adaptation to motion and predominance of a pattern-related P1 peak. Radial motion (with increasing velocity and decreasing spatial frequency towards the periphery) produces larger reactions as compared to a unidirectional translation. In view of the slow maturation (up to the age of 18 years) and early ageing of the visual motion processing system, the use of age-dependent latency norms may be necessary. Since early or selective involvement of the motion processing system is suspected in some CNS disorders, we suggest an evaluation of the utility of motion-onset VEPs as part of the electrophysiological CNS examination since this method may recognise motion processing involvement better than other methods. Motion-onset VEPs might increase the sensitivity of this examination for diagnosing CNS diseases including Multiple Sclerosis, Neuroborreliosis, Glaucoma, Dyslexia and Encephalopathies.

Attention, reading and dyslexia

It has been proposed that magnocellular deficits cause dyslexia through reduced attention. According to one model (Vidyasagar, Clinical and Experimental Optometry 2004; 87: 4-10), attention is shifted from letter to letter during fixations and magnocellular deficits are hypothesised to cause reading problems by interfering with the ability to control the attention. The present report points out several problems in this model. 1. It requires dissociation of eye movements and attention, which may be problematic within the framework of reading. 2. There is direct evidence to indicate that reading is not carried out in a letter-to-letter manner during fixations. 3. There are aspects of the visual performance of dyslexic readers, which are difficult to attribute to inattention. 4. There are indications that attentional deficiencies of dyslexic readers are not associated with magnocellular deficits. 5. The evidence for linking magnocellular deficits to dyslexia in general is weak.

Is coherent motion an appropriate test for magnocellular sensitivity?

The suggestion that coherent motion may serve as a test of magnocellular sensitivity is problematic. However, the nature of the problems depends on how the "magnocellular system" is defined. If this term is limited to subcortical entities, the problems are that subcortical neurons are not directionally selective, and that their receptive fields are too small to account for the spatial summation of coherent motion. If "magnocellular system" is defined to include cortical entities, such as area MT, one is faced with the fact that this definition itself is problematic as well as the problem that area MT is known to receive parvocellular and koniocellular inputs.

Motion-onset VEPs reflect long maturation and early aging of visual motion-processing system

Pattern-reversal and motion-onset visual evoked potentials (VEPs) were simultaneously tested in a group of 70 healthy subjects between the ages of 6-60 years to verify suspected differences in maturation and aging dynamics of the pattern and motion processing subsystems of the visual pathway. The motion-onset VEPs displayed dramatic configuration development and shortening of latencies up to 18 years of age (correl. coeff. -0.85; p < 0.001) and systematic prolongation from about 20 years of age (correl. coeff. 0.70; p < 0.001). This confirms long-lasting maturation of the magnocellular system and/or motion processing cortex and their early age related changes. Less significant changes of pattern-reversal VEPs in the tested age range can be interpreted as a sign of early maturation of the parvocellular system and its enhanced functional endurance in the elderly.