Nonlinguistic perceptual deficits associated with reading and language disorders

Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 482-486

  Wright, Beverly A ^a   Bowen, Richard W ^c   Zecker, Steven G ^b  

^a Audiol Hear Sci Prog 2299 N C   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUDITORY SYSTEM; BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE; DYSLEXIA; HUMAN; LANGUAGE DISABILITY; PERCEPTION DISORDER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; VISUAL SYSTEM;

EID: 0033865131     PISSN: 09594388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-4388(00)00119-7     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Seventh Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of Public Law 94-142: the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, 1985. US Department of Education.
2. Studdert-Kennedy M., Mody M. Auditory temporal perception deficits in the reading impaired: a critical review of the evidence. Psychol Bull Rev. 2:1995;508-514.
3. Mody M., Studdert-Kennedy M., Brady S. Speech perception deficits in poor readers: auditory processing or phonological coding. J Exp Child Psychol. 64:1997;199-231.
4. Stein J., Walsh V. To see but not to read; the magnocellular theory of dyslexia. Trends Neurosci. 20:1997;147-152.
5. Farmer M., Klein R. The evidence for a temporal processing deficit linked to dyslexia: a review. Psychol Bull Rev. 2:1995;460-464.
6. Patterson K., Ralph M. Selective disorders of reading? Curr Opin Neurobiol. 9:1999;235-239.
7. Stein J., Talcott J. The magnocellular theory of developmental dyslexia. Dyslexia. 5:1999;59-77.
8. Anderson K., Brown C., Tallal P. Developmental language disorders: evidence for a basic processing deficit. Curr Opin Neurol Neurosurg. 6:1993;98-106.
9. Wright B., Lombardino L., King W., Pursnik C., Leonard C., Merzenich M. Deficits in auditory temporal and spectral resolution in language-impaired children. Nature. 387:1997;176-178.
10. Bishop D., Carlyon R., Deeks J., Bishop S. Auditory temporal processing impairment: neither necessary nor sufficient for causing language impairment in children. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 42:1999;1295-1310. Reports a failure to replicate several previous demonstrations of deficits in nonlinguistic perception in children with language disorder. The authors provide a number of interesting possible explanations for these failures that could help guide future research. Among them is the idea that nonlinguistic perceptual deficits affect language development only in children genetically predisposed to language disorder.
11. Kujala T., Myllyviita K., Tervaniemi M., Alho K., Kallio J., Naatanen R. Basic auditory dysfunction in dyslexia as demonstrated by brain activity measurements. Psychophysiology. 37:2000;262-266.
12. Menell P., McAnally K., Stein J. Psychophysical sensitivity and physiological response to amplitude modulation in adult dyslexic listeners. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2:1999;797-803.
13. McAnally K., Stein J. Auditory temporal coding in dyslexia. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 263:1996;961-965.
14. Schulte-Korne G., Deimel W., Bartling J., Remschmidt H. Role of auditory temporal processing for reading and spelling disability. Percept Mot Skills. 86:1998;1043-1047.
15. Helenius P., Uutela K., Hari R. Auditory stream segregation in dyslexic adults. Brain. 122:1999;907-913. When listening to tones alternating between two different frequencies, unimpaired listeners hear a single stream of ordered, connected tones at slow alternation rates, but hear two segregated, non-ordered frequency streams at faster alternation rates. Adults with a reading disorder experienced the segregation effect at slower alternation rates than controls. Assuming that impaired listeners hear both frequencies at fast presentation rates, this result indicates that difficulties in ordering two sounds are not necessarily related to a failure to discriminate the sounds.
16. Tallal P., Piercy M. Defects of nonverbal auditory perception in children with aphasia. Nature. 241:1973;468-469.
17. Tallal P. Auditory temporal perception, phonics, and reading disabilities in children. Brain Lang. 9:1980;182-198.
18. Merzenich M., Jenkins W., Johnston P., Schreiner C., Miller S., Tallal P. Temporal processing deficits of language-learning impaired children ameliorated by training. Science. 271:1996;77-81.
19. Tallal P., Miller S., Bedi G., Byma B., Wang X., Nagarajan S., Schreiner C., Jenkins W., Merzenich M. Language comprehension in language-learning impaired children improved with acoustically modified speech. Science. 271:1996;81-84.
20. Harel S., Nachson I. Dichotic listening to temporal tonal stimuli by good and poor readers. Percept Mot Skills. 84:1997;467-473.
21. Heath S.M., Hogben J.H., Clark C.D. Auditory temporal processing in disabled readers with and without oral language delay. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 40:1999;637-647. Compared to controls, children with both reading and language disorders, but not those with only reading disorder, are impaired in their ability to perceive the presentation order of brief sounds. These data provide evidence for disability subtypes that may ultimately help to clarify why different investigations of perceptual ability in reading and language disorders sometimes yield conflicting results.
22. Bishop D., Bishop S., Bright P., James C., Delaney T., Tallal P. Different origin of auditory and phonological processing problems in children with language impairment: evidence from a twin study. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 42:1999;155-168.
23. Nagarajan S., Mahncke H., Salz T., Tallal P., Roberts T., Merzenich M. Cortical auditory signal processing in poor readers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 96:1999;6483-6488.
24. Baldeweg T., Richardson A., Watkins S., Foale C., Gruzelier J. Impaired auditory frequency discrimination in dyslexia detected with mismatch evoked potentials. Ann Neurol. 45:1999;495-503.
25. Hari R., Saaskilahti A., Helenius P., Uutela K. Non-impaired auditory phase locking in dyslexic adults. Neuroreport. 10:1999;2347-2348.
26. Witton C., Talcott J., Hansen P., Richardson A., Griffiths T., Rees A., Stein J., Green G. Sensitivity to dynamic auditory and visual stimuli predicts nonword reading ability in both dyslexic and normal readers. Curr Biol. 8:1998;791-797.
27. Stein J., McAnally K. Auditory temporal processing in developmental dyslexics. Irish J Psychol. 16:1995;220-228.
28. Talcott J., Witton C., McLean M., Hansen P., Rees A., Green G., Stein J. Dynamic sensory sensitivity and children's word decoding skills. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 97:2000;2952-2957. Unselected 10-year old children (n=32) without a reading disorder were tested on a battery of perceptual and psychometric tests and tests of component literacy skills. After controlling for intelligence and reading ability, auditory frequency-modulation sensitivity explained independent variance in phonological skill, while visual sensitivity to coherent motion explained independent variance in orthographic skill. These results suggest that auditory and visual function may play separate roles in determining reading ability.
29. Grant A., Zangaladze A., Thiagarajah C., Sathian K. Tactile perception in developmental dyslexia: a psychophysical study using gratings. Neuropsychologia. 37:1999;1201-1211. Adults with a reading disorder and controls were compared on their ability to discriminate the orientation of passively applied tactile gratings with equally spaced ridges and grooves of various widths. Observers with a reading disorder required larger scale gratings to achieve criterion performance than did controls. This report extends the range of nonlinguistic perceptual deficits to include tactile discrimination of grating orientation.
30. Hill N., Bailey P., Griffiths Y., Snowling M. Frequency acuity and binaural masking release in dyslexic listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 106:1999;53-58.
31. Helzer J., Champlin C., Gillam R. Auditory temporal resolution in specifically language-impaired and age-matched children. Percept Mot Skills. 83:1996;1171-1181.
32. Dougherty R., Cynader M., Bjornson B., Edgell D., Giaschi D. Dichotic pitch: a new stimulus distinguishes normal and dyslexic auditory function. Neuroreport. 9:1998;3001-3005.
33. Lovegrove W., Bowling A., Badcock D., Blackwood M. Specific reading disability: differences in contrast sensitivity as a function of spatial frequency. Science. 210:1980;439-440.
34. Breitmeyer B. Sustained (P) and transient (M) channels in vision: a review and implications for reading. Willows D., Kruk R., Corcos E. Visual Processes in Reading and Reading Disabilities. 1993;95-110 Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
35. Slaghius W., Ryan J. Spatio-temporal contrast sensitivity, coherent motion, and visible persistence in developmental dyslexia. Vision Res. 39:1999;651-668.
36. Cornelissen P., Hansen P., Hutton J., Evangelinou V., Stein J. Magnocellular visual function and children's single word reading. Vision Res. 38:1998;471-482.
37. Cornelissen P., Hansen P. Motion detection, letter position encoding, and single word reading. Ann Dyslexia. 48:1998;155-188.
38. Everatt J., Bradshaw M., Hibbard P. Visual processing and dyslexia. Perception. 28:1999;243-254.
39. Demb J., Boynton G., Best M., Heeger D. Psychophysical evidence for a magnocellular deficit in dyslexia. Vision Res. 38:1998;1555-1559.
40. Eden G., VanMeter J., Rumsey J., Maisog J., Woods R., Zeffiro T. Abnormal processing of visual motion in dyslexia revealed by functional brain imaging. Nature. 382:1996;68-69.
41. Cestnick L., Coltheart M. The relationship between language processing and visual-processing deficits in developmental dyslexia. Cognition. 71:1999;231-255. In children with a reading disability, impaired apparent motion perception was correlated with non-word reading (phonological processing) but not with exception-word reading (lexical processing). The authors offer two explanations: impaired left-to-right processing of letters in non-words, or a coincidental neuro-developmental deficit in magnocellular layers of the physically adjacent lateral geniculate nucleus (motion impairment) and medial geniculate nucleus (phonological impairment) of the thalamus.
42. Visto J., Cranford J., Scudder R. Dynamic temporal processing of nonspeech acoustic information by children with specific language impairment. J Speech Hear Res. 39:1996;510-517.
43. Hari R., Kiesila P. Deficit of temporal auditory processing in dyslexic adults. Neurosci Lett. 205:1996;138-140.
44. Borsting E., Ridder W., Dudeck K., Kelly C., Matsui L., Motoyama J. The presence of a magnocellular defect depends on the type of dyslexia. Vision Res. 36:1996;1047-1053.
45. Gross-Glenn K., Skottun B.C., Glenn W., Kushch A., Lingua R., Dunbar M., Jallad B., Lubs H.A., Levin B., Rabin M.et al. Contrast sensitivity in dyslexia. Vis Neurosci. 12:1995;153-163.
46. Cornelissen P., Richardson A., Mason A., Fowler S., Stein J. Contrast sensitivity and coherent motion detection measured at photopic luminance levels in dyslexics and controls. Vision Res. 35:1995;1483-1494.
47. Skottun B. The magnocellular deficit theory of dyslexia: the evidence from contrast sensitivity. Vision Res. 40:2000;111-127. The magnocellular-deficit hypothesis predicts that, in reading disorder, sensitivity to visual spatial contrast should be impaired at low, but not at high, spatial frequencies. Contrary to this prediction, this review reports that the majority of studies on spatial contrast sensitivity in reading disorder show either no difference between affected individuals and controls or show deficits in affected individuals at high, but not low, spatial frequencies.
48. Skottun B., Parke L. The possible relationship between visual deficits and dyslexia: examination of a critical assumption. J Learning Disabil. 32:1999;2-5.
49. Burr D., Holt J., Johnstone J., Ross J. Selective depression of motion sensitivity during saccades. J Physiol. 333:1982;1-15.
50. Volkman F., Riggs L., White K., Moore R. Contrast sensitivity during eye movements. Vision Res. 18:1978;1193-1199.
51. Burr D., Morrone M., Ross J. Selective suppression of the magnocellular visual pathway during saccadic eye movements. Nature. 371:1994;511-513.
52. Raymond J., Sorenson R. Visual motion perception in children with dyslexia: normal detection but abnormal integration. Visual Cog. 5:1998;389-404.
53. Rosen S. Language disorders: a problem with auditory processing? Curr Biol. 9:1999;R698-R700.
54. Eden G., Stein J., Wood H., Wood F. Temporal and spatial processing in reading disabled and normal children. Cortex. 31:1995;451-468.
55. Tallal P., Merzenich M., Miller S., Jenkins W. Language learning impairments: integrating basic science, technology, and remediation. Exp Brain Res. 123:1998;210-219.
56. Stein J., Richardson A., Fowler M. Monocular occlusion can improve binocular control and reading in dyslexics. Brain. 123:2000;164-170. A large group (n=143) of children having both a reading disorder and unstable binocular control were randomly assigned to wear spectacles with or without the left lens occluded. Compared to children with the unoccluded spectacles, children with the occluded spectacles were more likely to gain binocular control and to improve reading skills after 3 months. After 9 months, children who gained and maintained stable fixation through occlusion had nearly double the rate of reading improvement of those whose vision was unoccluded or those who lost stable fixation despite using occluded spectacles. The authors conclude that monocular occlusion is a treatment that rapidly improves binocular control and leads to faster reading improvement.