Developmental dyslexia: Specific phonological deficit or general sensorimotor dysfunction?

Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 212-218

  Ramus, Franck ^a  

^a PSL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMNESIA; ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; BRAIN DYSFUNCTION; DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER; DYSLEXIA; HUMAN; HYPOACUSIS; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MAGNOCELLULAR NUCLEUS; MOTOR CONTROL; MOTOR DYSFUNCTION; PHONETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SENSORIMOTOR FUNCTION; SENSORY DYSFUNCTION; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISION; VISUAL DISORDER;

EID: 0038057808     PISSN: 09594388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00035-7     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Liberman I.Y. Segmentation of the spoken word. Bulletin of the Orton. Society. 23:1973;65-77.
2. Stanovich K.E. Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and the garden-variety poor reader: the phonological-core variable-difference model. J. Learn. Disabil. 21:1988;590-604.
3. Snowling MJ: Dyslexia 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell; 2000.
4. Galaburda A.M., Sherman G.F., Rosen G.D., Aboitiz F., Geschwind N. Developmental dyslexia: four consecutive patients with cortical anomalies. Ann. Neurol. 18:1985;222-233.
5. Paulesu E., Démonet J.-F., Fazio F., McCrory E., Chanoine V., Brunswick N., Cappa S.F., Cossu G., Habib M., Frith C.D., Frith U. Dyslexia: cultural diversity and biological unity. Science. 291:2001;2165-2167.
6. Temple E., Poldrack R.A., Salidis J., Deutsch G.K., Tallal P., Merzenich M.M., Gabrieli J.D. Disrupted neural responses to phonological and orthographic processing in dyslexic children: an fMRI study. Neuroreport. 12:2001;299-307.
7. Tallal P. Auditory temporal perception, phonics, and reading disabilities in children. Brain Lang. 9:1980;182-198.
8. Lovegrove W.J., Bowling A., Badcock B., Blackwood M. Specific reading disability: differences in contrast sensitivity as a function of spatial frequency. Science. 210:1980;439-440.
9. Nicolson R.I., Fawcett A.J., Dean P. Dyslexia, development and the cerebellum. Trends Neurosci. 24:2001;515-516 The latest and most comprehensive description of the cerebellar theory of dyslexia.
10. Stein J. The magnocellular theory of developmental dyslexia. Dyslexia. 7:2001;12-36 The latest and most comprehensive description of the magnocellular theory of dyslexia.
11. Hari R., Renvall H. Impaired processing of rapid stimulus sequences in dyslexia. Trends Cogn. Sci. 5:2001;525-532.
12. Stoodley C.J., Talcott J.B., Carter E.L., Witton C., Stein J.F. Selective deficits of vibrotactile sensitivity in dyslexic readers. Neurosci. Lett. 295:2000;13-16.
13. Wright B.A., Bowen R.W., Zecker S.G. Nonlinguistic perceptual deficits associated with reading and language disorders. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 10:2000;482-486.
14. Temple E. Brain mechanisms in normal and dyslexic readers. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 12:2002;178-183.
15. Ramus F. Dyslexia - talk of two theories. Nature. 412:2001;393-395.
16. Rey V., De Martino S., Espesser R., Habib M. Temporal processing and phonological impairment in dyslexia: effect of phoneme lengthening on order judgement of two consonants. Brain Lang. 80:2002;576-591.
17. De Martino S., Espesser R., Rey V., Habib M. The 'temporal processing deficit' hypothesis in dyslexia: new experimental evidence. Brain Cogn. 46:2001;104-108.
18. Share D.L., Jorm A.F., MacLean R., Matthews R. Temporal processing and reading disability. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 15:2002;151-178 This is a unique longitudinal evaluation of the auditory temporal processing hypothesis. The authors examined the relationship between auditory (Tallal's repetition test [7]), phonological and reading skills from kindergarten to grade 2. They found that dyslexic children tended to have impaired auditory processing at long rather than short inter-stimulus intervals and only compared to the chronological age control group. They also found that early auditory deficits did not predict later phonological and reading impairments.
19. Heiervang E., Stevenson J., Hugdahl K. Auditory processing in children with dyslexia. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry. 43:2002;931-938.
20. Chiappe P., Stringer R., Siegel L.S., Stanovich K.E. Why the timing deficit hypothesis does not explain reading disability in adults. Reading and Writing. 15:2002;73-107 This is one of a few studies that addresses the temporal processing hypothesis in the visual, auditory and motor domains within the same subjects, and with systematic manipulation of inter-stimulus intervals. It reveals that while dyslexics are often impaired at temporal processing tasks, there is no interaction with interval duration. The authors also found that temporal processing skills do not predict phonological skills.
21. France S.J., Rosner B.S., Hansen P.C., Calvin C., Talcott J.B., Richardson A.J., Stein J.F. Auditory frequency discrimination in adult developmental dyslexics. Percept. Psychophys. 64:2002;169-179.
22. Amitay S., Ben-Yehudah G., Banai K., Ahissar M. Disabled readers suffer from visual and auditory impairments but not from a specific magnocellular deficit. Brain. 125:2002;2272-2285 The authors have administered possibly the most comprehensive battery of visual psychophysical tests to date (and a few auditory tests) to adult dyslexics and controls. They have found that only a subset of dyslexics were impaired in these tasks, and not in the spatio-temporal range of frequencies predicted by the magno-cellular and temporal processing theories.
23. ••]).
24. Van Ingelghem M., van Wieringen A., Wouters J., Vandenbussche E., Onghena P., Ghesquière P. Psychophysical evidence for a general temporal processing deficit in children with dyslexia. Neuroreport. 12:2001;3603-3607.
25. Kronbichler M., Hutzler F., Wimmer H. Dyslexia: verbal impairments in the absence of magnocellular impairments. Neuroreport. 13:2002;617-620 Another rare study looking simultaneously at auditory, visual, motor and phonological skills in dyslexic children. The authors report no significant group differences in any of the sensorimotor tasks, yet large differences in phonological skill.
26. Witton C., Stein J.F., Stoodley C.J., Rosner B.S., Talcott J.B. Separate influences of acoustic AM and FM sensitivity on the phonological decoding skills of impaired and normal readers. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 14:2002;866-874.
27. Goswami U., Thomson J., Richardson U., Stainthorp R., Hughes D., Rosen S., Scott S.K. Amplitude envelope onsets and developmental dyslexia: a new hypothesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:2002;10911-10916.
28. Breier J.I., Gray L., Fletcher J.M., Diehl R.L., Klaas P., Foorman B.R., Molis M.R. Perception of voice and tone onset time continua in children with dyslexia with and without attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 80:2001;245-270.
29. ••]).
30. Rosen S., Manganari E. Is there a relationship between speech and nonspeech auditory processing in children with dyslexia? J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 44:2001;720-736 The authors administered a large battery of speech and non-speech perceptual tests to dyslexic and control children. They show that speech perception skills are not predicted by non-speech perception skills, and that the perceptual deficits found in a subset of dyslexics cannot be explained in terms of rapid temporal processing.
31. Ramus F., Rosen S., Dakin S.C., Day B.L., Castellote J.M., White S., Frith U. Theories of developmental dyslexia: insights from a multiple case study of dyslexic adults. Brain. 126:2003;841-865 This study describes possibly the largest battery of phonological, auditory, visual and cerebellar/motor tests administered to dyslexics and controls. It reports a very limited incidence of visual and motor deficits. Auditory deficits are present in 60% of the dyslexic sample, but with variable manifestations across individuals (not particularly rapid processing) and at the most an aggravating influence on the phonological deficit. Every single dyslexic in this sample shows a phonological deficit, with a third of them seeming to be entirely spared by any concurrent sensory or motor deficit.
32. McArthur G.M., Bishop D.V.M. Auditory perceptual processing in people with reading and oral language impairments: current issues and recommendations. Dyslexia. 7:2001;150-170.
33. Marshall C.M., Snowling M.J., Bailey P.J. Rapid auditory processing and phonological ability in normal readers and readers with dyslexia. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 44:2001;925-940.
34. Heim S., Freeman R.B. Jr., Eulitz C., Elbert T. Auditory temporal processing deficit in dyslexia is associated with enhanced sensitivity in the visual modality. Neuroreport. 12:2001;507-510.
35. Tallal P., Miller S., Fitch R.H. Neurobiological basis of speech: a case for the preeminence of temporal processing. Ann. NY Acad Sci. 682:1993;27-47.
36. Wright B.A., Lombardino L.J., King W.M., Puranik C.S., Leonard C.M., Merzenich M.M. Deficits in auditory temporal and spectral resolution in language-impaired children. Nature. 387:1997;176-178.
37. 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.
38. Tallal P., Miller S.L., Bedi G., Byma G., Wang X., Nagarajan S.S., Schreiner C., Jenkins W.M., Merzenich M.M. Language comprehension in language-learning impaired children improved with acoustically modified speech. Science. 271:1996;81-83.
39. Tallal P., Merzenich M.M., Miller S., Jenkins I.H. Language learning impairments: integrating basic science, technology, and remediation. Exp. Brain Res. 123:1998;210-219.
40. Kujala T., Karma K., Ceponiene R., Belitz S., Turkkila P., Tervaniemi M., Näätänen R. Plastic neural changes and reading improvement caused by audiovisual training in reading-impaired children. Proc. Natl. Acad Sci. USA. 98:2001;10509-10514.
41. Friel-Patti S., Frome Loeb D., Gillam R.B. Looking ahead: an introduction to five exploratory studies of Fast Forword. Am. J. Speech Lang. Pathol. 10:2001;195-202 This paper introduces a 'Special forum on Fast ForWord' including five small-scale independent assessments of the controversial remediation programme [39]. It recalls all the important issues concerning the proper evaluation of remediation programs in general, and that of Fast ForWord in particular (NB: they also apply to [40]).
42. •]. It concludes that Fast ForWord does not seem more effective than other more conventional remediation programs.
43. Hook P.E., Macaruso P., Jones S. Efficacy of Fast ForWord training on facilitating acquisition of reading skills by children with reading difficulties - a longitudinal study. Ann. Dyslexia. LI:2001;75-96 In this study, the effectiveness of the Fast ForWord programme was compared to the (less intensive) Orton Gillingham training in two matched groups of reading-disabled children. Overall, the authors found very similar (positive) outcomes for the two programs, and question the specific role played by acoustically modified speech.
44. Wilkins AJ: Visual Stress. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995.
45. Bouldoukian J., Wilkins A.J., Evans B.J. Randomised controlled trial of the effect of coloured overlays on the rate of reading of people with specific learning difficulties. Ophthalmic. Physiol. Opt. 22:2002;55-60.
46. Wilkins A.J., Lewis E., Smith F., Rowland E., Tweedie W. Coloured overlays and their benefit for reading. J. Res. Reading. 24:2001;41-64.
47. Spinelli D., De Luca M., Judica A., Zoccolotti P. Crowding effects on word identification in developmental dyslexia. Cortex. 38:2002;179-200.
48. Hari R., Renvall H., Tanskanen T. Left minineglect in dyslexic adults. Brain. 124:2001;1373-1380.
49. Ridder W.H. III, Borsting E., Banton T. All developmental dyslexic subtypes display an elevated motion coherence threshold. Optom. Vis. Sci. 78:2001;510-517.
50. Davis C., Castles A., McAnally K., Gray J. Lapses of concentration and dyslexic performance on the Ternus task. Cognition. 81:2001;B21-B31.
51. Hansen P.C., Stein J.F., Orde S.R., Winter J.L., Talcott J.B. Are dyslexics' visual deficits limited to measures of dorsal stream function? Neuroreport. 12:2001;1527-1530.
52. Romani A., Conte S., Callieco R., Bergamaschi R., Versino M., Lanzi G., Zambrino C.A., Cosi V. Visual evoked potential abnormalities in dyslexic children. Funct. Neurol. 16:2001;219-229.
53. Pammer K., Wheatley C. Isolating the M(y)-cell response in dyslexia using the spatial frequency doubling illusion. Vision Res. 41:2001;2139-2147.
54. Skottun B.C. On the use of metacontrast to assess magnocellular function in dyslexic readers. Percept. Psychophys. 63:2001;1271-1274.
55. Skottun B.C. On the use of the Ternus test to assess magnocellular function. Perception. 30:2001;1449-1457.
56. Olson R., Datta H. Visual-temporal processing in reading-disabled and normal twins. Reading and Writing. 15:2002;127-149 This is the first behavioural-genetic study of visual magnocellular function, conducted on 356 twins. It found that reading-disabled twins had significantly higher contrast detection thresholds on average; however, this was found across all spatial and temporal frequencies. Moreover, there was no significant genetic influence on individual differences in threshold levels.
57. Ben-Yehudah G., Sackett E., Malchi-Ginzberg L., Ahissar M. Impaired temporal contrast sensitivity in dyslexics is specific to retain-and-compare paradigms. Brain. 124:2001;1381-1395.
58. Farrag A.F., Khedr E.M., Abel-Naser W. Impaired parvocellular pathway in dyslexic children. Eur. J. Neurol. 9:2002;359-363.
59. Hill G.T., Raymond J.E. Deficits of motion transparency perception in adult developmental dyslexics with normal unidirectional motion sensitivity. Vision Res. 42:2002;1195-1203.
60. Stuart G.W., McAnally K.I., Castles A. Can contrast sensitivity functions in dyslexia be explained by inattention rather than a magnocellular deficit? Vision Res. 41:2001;3205-3211.
61. Simmers A.J., Bex P.J., Smith F.K.H., Wilkins A.J. Spatiotemporal visual function in tinted lens wearers. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 42:2001;879-884.
62. Ramus F, Pidgeon E, Frith U: The relationship between motor control and phonology in dyslexic children. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2003, 44 in press.
63. Fawcett A.J., Nicolson R.I., Maclagan F. Cerebellar tests differentiate between groups of poor readers with and without IQ discrepancy. J. Learn Disabil. 34:2001;119-135.
64. Wolff P.H. Timing precision and rhythm in developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing. 15:2002;179-206.
65. Wimmer H., Mayringer H., Raberger T. Reading and dual-task balancing: evidence against the automatization deficit explanation of developmental dyslexia. J. Learn. Disabil. 32:1999;473-478.
66. Nicolson R.I., Daum I., Schugens M.M., Fawcett A.J., Schulz A. Eyeblink conditioning indicates cerebellar abnormality in dyslexia. Exp. Brain Res. 143:2002;42-50.
67. Kelly S.W., Griffiths S., Frith U. Evidence for implicit sequence learning in dyslexia. Dyslexia. 8:2002;43-52.
68. Witton C., Talcott J.B., Hansen P.C., Richardson A.J., Griffiths T.D., Rees A., Stein J.F., Green G.G. Sensitivity to dynamic auditory and visual stimuli predicts nonword reading ability in both dyslexic and normal readers. Curr. Biol. 8:1998;791-797.
69. Laasonen M., Service E., Virsu V. Temporal order and processing acuity of visual, auditory, and tactile perception in developmentally dyslexic young adults. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 1:2001;394-410.
70. Laasonen M., Service E., Virsu V. Crossmodal temporal order and processing acuity in developmentally dyslexic young adults. Brain Lang. 80:2002;340-354.
71. Hill E.L. Non-specific nature of specific language impairment: a review of the literature with regard to concomitant motor impairments. Int. J. Lang. Commun. Disord. 36:2001;149-171.
72. McArthur G.M., Hogben J.H. Auditory backward recognition masking in children with a specific language impairment and children with a specific reading disability. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 109:2001;1092-1100.
73. Milne E., Swettenham J., Hansen P., Campbell R., Jeffries H., Plaisted K. High motion coherence thresholds in children with autism. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry. 43:2002;255-263.
74. O'Brien J., Spencer J., Atkinson J., Braddick O., Wattam-Bell J. Form and motion coherence processing in dyspraxia: evidence of a global spatial processing deficit. Neuroreport. 13:2002;1399-1402.
75. Atkinson J., King J., Braddick O., Nokes L., Anker S., Braddick F. A specific deficit of dorsal stream function in Williams' syndrome. Neuroreport. 8:1997;1919-1922.
76. Davis C.J., Gayan J., Knopik V.S., Smith S.D., Cardon L.R., Pennington B.F., Olson R.K., DeFries J.C. Etiology of reading difficulties and rapid naming: the Colorado twin study of reading disability. Behav. Genet. 31:2001;625-635.
77. Bishop D.V., Bishop S.J., 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.
78. Wolf M, Goldberg, O'Rourke A, Gidney C, Lovett M, Cirino P, Morris R: The second deficit: an investigation of the independence of phonological and naming-speed deficits in developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing 2002, 15:43-72.
79. Compton D.L., DeFries J.C., Olson R.K. Are RAN- and phonological awareness-deficits additive in children with reading disabilities? Dyslexia. 7:2001;125-149.
80. Ramus F. Outstanding questions about phonological processing in dyslexia. Dyslexia. 7:2001;197-216.
81. Facoetti A., Turatto M., Lorusso M.L., Mascetti G.G. Orienting of visual attention in dyslexia: evidence for asymmetric hemispheric control of attention. Exp. Brain Res. 138:2001;46-53.
82. Pennington B.F., Lefly D.L. Early reading development in children at family risk for dyslexia. Child Dev. 72:2001;816-833.
83. Lyytinen H., Ahonen T., Eklund K., Guttorm T.K., Laakso M.L., Leinonen S., Leppanen P.H., Lyytinen P., Poikkeus A.M., Puolakanaho A.et al. Developmental pathways of children with and without familial risk for dyslexia during the first years of life. Dev. Neuropsychol. 20:2001;535-554.
84. Lundberg I. The child's route into reading and what can go wrong. Dyslexia. 8:2002;1-13.