Dyslexic Readers Improve without Training When Using a Computer-Guided Reading Strategy

Dyslexia Due to Visual Impairments

Reading involves many different abilities that are necessary or sufficient conditions for fluent and flawless reading. The absence of one necessary or of all sufficient conditions is a cause of dyslexia. The present study investigates whether too short fixation times and an impaired ability to recognize a string of letters simultaneously are causes of dyslexia. The frequency and types of reading mistakes were investigated in a tachistoscopic pseudoword experiment with 100 children with dyslexia to test the impact of too short fixation times and the attempts of children with dyslexia to recognize more letters simultaneously than they can when reading pseudowords. The experiment demonstrates that all types of reading mistakes disappear when the fixation time increases and/or the number of letters that the children try to recognize simultaneously is reduced. The results cannot be interpreted as being due to altered visual crowding, impaired attention, or impaired phonological awareness, but can be regarded as an effect of impaired temporal summation and a dysfunction in the ventral stream of the visual system.

Letter Migrations between Words in Reading Aloud Can Result Either from an Impairment in Orthographic Input or in Phonological Output

Letter migrations between words in reading aloud (e.g., reading “cane love” as “lane love” or “lane cove”) are known to result from a deficit in the visual-orthographic analysis and characterize attentional dyslexia. In spontaneous speech, individuals with impairment in the phonological output buffer may show migrations of phonemes between words. The purpose of this study was to examine whether migrations between words in reading aloud can also result from a deficit in the phonological output buffer, to explore the characteristics of migrations resulting from orthographic input and from phonological output deficits, and to examine methods to distinguish these two sources. Using tasks of reading aloud of lists of 92–182 word pairs, we identified 18 adults and adolescents with developmental dyslexia who made between-word letter migrations in reading aloud, significantly more than age-matched controls (372 adults, 26 7th-graders and 44 4th–5th-graders). To distinguish between the orthographic input and phonological output sources for these migrations, we administered a test assessing orthographic input without spoken output (written semantic decision on 140 migratable word pairs) and a repetition test of 36 auditorily presented migratable word pairs, assessing spoken output without orthographic input (as well as nonword repetition and 3 span tests). These tests indicated that the migrations in reading aloud of 10 of the participants with dyslexia resulted from an orthographic input deficit—they made migrations not only in reading aloud but also in written word pair comprehension, but not in word pair repetition. For the other 8 participants, the migrations resulted from a phonological output deficit: they made migrations in reading aloud and in word pair repetition, but not in comprehension, and had limited spans and made errors in nonword repetition. We identified several differences between the two types of between-word errors: first, the individuals with attentional dyslexia made omissions of a letter that appeared in the same position in the two words, but the phonological output buffer group did not make such omissions. Second, the groups differed in the origin of migration: orthographic input migrations involve letters that are orthographically adjacent, whereas phonological output migrations involve phonologically adjacent phonemes: phonemes that have just been spoken or that are prepared together in the phonological buffer for production. Migrations from the line below and from 2 lines above the target occurred only in the orthographic input group. This study thus indicates that between-word migrations in reading aloud can result not only from attentional dyslexia, but also from a phonological output buffer deficit, and offers ways to distinguish between the two.

Topology of the lateral visual system: The fundus of the superior temporal sulcus and parietal area H connect nonvisual cerebrum to the lateral occipital lobe

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Mapping the topology of the visual system is critical for understanding how complex cognitive processes like reading can occur. We aim to describe the connectivity of the visual system to understand how the cerebrum accesses visual information in the lateral occipital lobe.

METHODS

Using meta-analytic software focused on task-based functional MRI studies, an activation likelihood estimation (ALE) of the visual network was created. Regions of interest corresponding to the cortical parcellation scheme previously published under the Human Connectome Project were co-registered onto the ALE to identify the hub-like regions of the visual network. Diffusion Spectrum Imaging-based fiber tractography was performed to determine the structural connectivity of these regions with extraoccipital cortices.

RESULTS

The fundus of the superior temporal sulcus (FST) and parietal area H (PH) were identified as hub-like regions for the visual network. FST and PH demonstrated several areas of coactivation beyond the occipital lobe and visual network. Furthermore, these parcellations were highly interconnected with other cortical regions throughout extraoccipital cortices related to their nonvisual functional roles. A cortical model demonstrating connections to these hub-like areas was created.

CONCLUSIONS

FST and PH are two hub-like areas that demonstrate extensive functional coactivation and structural connections to nonvisual cerebrum. Their structural interconnectedness with language cortices along with the abnormal activation of areas commonly located in the temporo-occipital region in dyslexic individuals suggests possible important roles of FST and PH in the integration of information related to language and reading. Future studies should refine our model by examining the functional roles of these hub areas and their clinical significance.

Dyslexia: Causes and Concomitant Impairments

In recent decades, theories have been presented to explain the nature of dyslexia, but the causes of dyslexia remained unclear. Although the investigation of the causes of dyslexia presupposes a clear understanding of the concept of cause, such an understanding is missing. The present paper proposes the absence of at least one necessary condition or the absence of all sufficient conditions as causes for impaired reading. The causes of impaired reading include: an incorrect fixation location, too short a fixation time, the attempt to recognize too many letters simultaneously, too large saccade amplitudes, and too short verbal reaction times. It is assumed that a longer required fixation time in dyslexic readers results from a functional impairment of areas V1, V2, and V3 that require more time to complete temporal summation. These areas and areas that receive input from them, such as the fusiform gyrus, are assumed to be impaired in their ability to simultaneously process a string of letters. When these impairments are compensated by a new reading strategy, reading ability improves immediately.

What Is Going on with Visual Attention in Reading and Dyslexia? A Critical Review of Recent Studies

This critical review examined current issues to do with the role of visual attention in reading. To do this, we searched for and reviewed 18 recent articles, including all that were found after 2019 and used a Latin alphabet. Inspection of these articles showed that the Visual Attention Span task was run a number of times in well-controlled studies and was typically a small but significant predictor of reading ability, even after potential covariation with phonological effects were accounted for. A number of other types of tasks were used to examine different aspects of visual attention, with differences between dyslexic readers and controls typically found. However, most of these studies did not adequately control for phonological effects, and of those that did, only very weak and non-significant results were found. Furthermore, in the smaller studies, separate within-group correlations between the tasks and reading performance were generally not provided, making causal effects of the manipulations difficult to ascertain. Overall, it seems reasonable to suggest that understanding how and why different types of visual tasks affect particular aspects of reading performance is an important area for future research.

Is Developmental Dyslexia Due to a Visual and Not a Phonological Impairment?

It is a widely held belief that developmental dyslexia (DD) is a phonological disorder in which readers have difficulty associating graphemes with their corresponding phonemes. In contrast, the magnocellular theory of dyslexia assumes that DD is a visual disorder caused by dysfunctional magnocellular neural pathways. The review explores arguments for and against these theories. Recent results have shown that DD is caused by (1) a reduced ability to simultaneously recognize sequences of letters that make up words, (2) longer fixation times required to simultaneously recognize strings of letters, and (3) amplitudes of saccades that do not match the number of simultaneously recognized letters. It was shown that pseudowords that could not be recognized simultaneously were recognized almost without errors when the fixation time was extended. However, there is an individual maximum number of letters that each reader with DD can recognize simultaneously. Findings on the neurobiological basis of temporal summation have shown that a necessary prolongation of fixation times is due to impaired processing mechanisms of the visual system, presumably involving magnocells and parvocells. An area in the mid-fusiform gyrus also appears to play a significant role in the ability to simultaneously recognize words and pseudowords. The results also contradict the assumption that DD is due to a lack of eye movement control. The present research does not support the assumption that DD is caused by a phonological disorder but shows that DD is due to a visual processing dysfunction.

Dyslexics' Fragile Oculomotor Control Is Further Destabilized by Increased Text Difficulty

Dyslexic adolescents demonstrate deficits in word decoding, recognition, and oculomotor coordination as compared to healthy controls. Our lab recently showed intrinsic deficits in large saccades and vergence movements with a Remobi device independent from reading. This shed new light on the field of dyslexia, as it has been debated in the literature whether the deficits in eye movements are a cause or consequence of reading difficulty. The present study investigates how these oculomotor problems are compensated for or aggravated by text difficulty. A total of 46 dyslexic and 41 non-dyslexic adolescents' eye movements were analyzed while reading L'Alouette, a dyslexia screening test, and 35 Kilos D'Espoir, a children's book with a reading age of 10 years. While reading the more difficult text, dyslexics made more mistakes, read slower, and made more regressive saccades; moreover, they made smaller amplitude saccades with abnormal velocity profiles (e.g., higher peak velocity but lower average velocity) and significantly higher saccade disconjugacy. While reading the simpler text, these differences persisted; however, the difference in saccade disconjugacy, although present, was no longer significant, nor was there a significant difference in the percentage of regressive saccades. We propose that intrinsic eye movement abnormalities in dyslexics such as saccade disconjugacy, abnormal velocity profiles, and cognitively associated regressive saccades can be particularly exacerbated if the reading text relies heavily on word decoding to extract meaning; increased number of regressive saccades are a manifestation of reading difficulty and not a problem of eye movement per se. These interpretations are in line with the motor theory of visual attention and our previous research describing the relationship between binocular motor control, attention, and cognition that exists outside of the field of dyslexia.