Is dyslexia caused by a visual deficit?

Dyslexic children suffer from less informative visual cues to control posture

The goal of this study was to investigate the effects of manipulation of the characteristics of visual stimulus on postural control in dyslexic children. A total of 18 dyslexic and 18 non-dyslexic children stood upright inside a moving room, as still as possible, and looked at a target at different conditions of distance between the participant and a moving room frontal wall (25-150 cm) and vision (full and central). The first trial was performed without vision (baseline). Then four trials were performed in which the room remained stationary and eight trials with the room moving, lasting 60s each. Mean sway amplitude, coherence, relative phase, and angular deviation were calculated. The results revealed that dyslexic children swayed with larger magnitude in both stationary and moving conditions. When the room remained stationary, all children showed larger body sway magnitude at 150 cm distance. Dyslexic children showed larger body sway magnitude in central compared to full vision condition. In the moving condition, body sway magnitude was similar between dyslexic and non-dyslexic children but the coupling between visual information and body sway was weaker in dyslexic children. Moreover, in the absence of peripheral visual cues, induced body sway in dyslexic children was temporally delayed regarding visual stimulus. Taken together, these results indicate that poor postural control performance in dyslexic children is related to how sensory information is acquired from the environment and used to produce postural responses. In conditions in which sensory cues are less informative, dyslexic children take longer to process sensory stimuli in order to obtain precise information, which leads to performance deterioration.

Paradoxical Enhancement of Letter Recognition in Developmental Dyslexia

In a number of studies, children diagnosed with developmental dyslexia reached normal scores in standard visual processing tasks, and some researchers concluded that visual processing deficits are not involved in the syndrome. The tasks used, however, may be insensitive to anomalous visual information processing strategies used to compensate for an underlying deficit. To determine whether children with dyslexia use anomalous visual processing strategies, a same-different task was applied, in which 2 items identical under rotation and reflection were judged as same. Pairs of letters or dot patterns were used, which were either symmetric or asymmetric in shape. Children with dyslexia performed faster than normal-reading children--in particular, remarkably, with letters. Symmetry of dot patterns facilitated performance in both children with dyslexia and normal-reading children; symmetry of letters facilitated performance in children with dyslexia but not in normal-reading children. Children with dyslexia, therefore, fail to adequately differentiate visual processing of linguistic and non-linguistic materials; they process symmetry in letters similarly to that in shapes, which leads in this particular task to the paradoxical observation of children with dyslexia outperforming normal readers with letters.

Visual rehabilitation of children with visual impairments

Visual rehabilitation, consisting of visual stimulation and visual training, is a common practice in the education of children with visual impairments. Ferrell and Muir have stated that scientific research into the effects of visual stimulation and training is ambiguous and that therefore stimulation and training should be abandoned. The support for this statement is reviewed by describing the scientific relevance and plausibility of the aims and presuppositions of visual stimulation and training programs as well as the results of 10 empirical intervention studies. The review results are in strong agreement with the claim of Ferrell and Muir to abandon noncontingent visual stimulation. It is hypothesized that it is possibly counterproductive for the adaptive functioning of the brain to show strong visual stimuli in artificial surroundings, which are noncontingent on the behavior of the child. Training of visual functions seems fruitful whenever skills that are ecologically valid and adapted to the individual needs and task demands of the child are trained. However, the empirical evidence is still too sparse to draw convincing conclusions. There is an urgent need for good randomized controlled trials with dependent variables that are relevant to everyday life.

Isolating the impact of visual perception on dyslexics' reading ability

A large body of data suggests that phonological deficits play an important causal role in dyslexics' reading difficulties. The functional role of visual impairments is still highly debated. Many recent studies have shown clear visual deficits in large subgroups of dyslexics. However, the relationship between these deficits and visual routines required for reading is not clear. To assess the direct contribution of visual factors to dyslexics' slower and less accurate reading, we composed a task that was similar to single word reading in its basic visual characteristics, but had none of the other (phonological, morphological, semantic, etc.) aspects of reading. Young adult dyslexics, with average or above general cognitive abilities, and controls matched for age and cognitive skills participated in the study. We measured both SOA and contrast thresholds for identifying unfamiliar letters. Letters were chosen from an alphabet graphically similar to Hebrew and English (a subset of Georgian letters), but unfamiliar to the subjects. Effects of decreasing letter size, increasing letter crowding (by adding a flanker letter on each side) and adding white noise, were measured. Dyslexics performed as well as controls under all test conditions, and had similar effect sizes. We thus conclude that, despite the data showing that dyslexics have marked difficulties with single word reading, the cause of these difficulties is not a visual processing deficit.