Modeling the Variability of Developmental Dyslexia

doi:10.1017/9781108553377.016

16 - Modeling the Variability of Developmental Dyslexia

from Part II - Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Developmental Dyslexia

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 September 2019

Johannes C. Ziegler ,

Conrad Perry and

Edited by

Charles Perfetti and

Ludo Verhoeven: Affiliation:
Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen
Charles Perfetti: Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Kenneth Pugh: Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Reading is a highly complex task that relies on the integration of visual, orthographic, phonological and semantic information. This complexity is clearly reflected in current computational models of reading (Coltheart et al., 2001; Harm & Seidenberg, 1999, 2004; Perry, Ziegler, & Zorzi, 2007, 2010; Plaut et al., 1996). These models specify the “ingredients” of the reading process in a precise and detailed fashion as they implement the units and computations that are necessary to go from the visual information to word recognition and word production. Such models make it possible to simulate real reading performance in terms of reading latencies (how long it takes to compute the pronunciation of a word or pseudoword) and reading accuracy (whether the output of the model is correct). Computational models are particularly well suited to helping us understand reading impairments, such as developmental or acquired dyslexia.

Type: Chapter
Information: Developmental Dyslexia across Languages and Writing Systems , pp. 350 - 371

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108553377.016 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ahissar, M. (2007). Dyslexia and the anchoring-deficit hypothesis. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(11), 458–465.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ahissar, M., Lubin, Y., Putter-Katz, H., & Banai, K. (2006). Dyslexia and the failure to form a perceptual anchor. Nature Neuroscience, 9(12), 1558–1564.Google Scholar

Bosse, M. L., Tainturier, M. J., & Valdois, S. (2007). Developmental dyslexia: The visual attention span deficit hypothesis. Cognition, 104(2), 198–230.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bruck, M. (1992). Persistence of dyslexics’ phonological awareness deficits. Developmental Psychology, 28, 874–886.Google Scholar

Castles, A., & Coltheart, M. (1993). Varieties of developmental dyslexia. Cognition, 47(2), 149–180.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Collis, N. L., Kohnen, S., & Kinoshita, S. (2013). The role of visual spatial attention in adult developmental dyslexia. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (Hove), 66(2), 245–260.Google Scholar

Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108(1), 204–256.Google Scholar

Di Filippo, G., Zoccolotti, P., & Ziegler, J. C. (2008). Rapid naming deficits in dyslexia: a stumbling block for the perceptual anchor theory of dyslexia. Developmental Science, 11(6), F40-F47.Google Scholar

Facoetti, A., Corradi, N., Ruffino, M., Gori, S., & Zorzi, M. (2010). Visual spatial attention and speech segmentation are both impaired in preschoolers at familial risk for developmental dyslexia. Dyslexia, 16(3), 226–239.Google Scholar

Facoetti, A., Ruffino, M., Peru, A., Paganoni, P., & Chelazzi, L. (2008). Sluggish engagement and disengagement of non-spatial attention in dyslexic children. Cortex, 44(9), 1221–1233.Google Scholar

Facoetti, A., Trussardi, A. N., Ruffino, M. et al. (2009). Multisensory spatial attention deficits are predictive of phonological decoding skills in developmental dyslexia. J Cogn Neurosci, 22(5), 1011–1025.Google Scholar

Facoetti, A., Zorzi, M., Cestnick, L. et al. (2006). The relationship between visuospatial attention and nonword reading in developmental dyslexia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23, 841–855.Google Scholar

Franceschini, S., Gori, S., Ruffino, M., Pedrolli, K., & Facoetti, A. (2012). A causal link between visual spatial attention and reading acquisition. Current Biology, 22(9), 814–819.Google Scholar

Goswami, U. (2011). A temporal sampling framework for developmental dyslexia. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(1), 3–10.Google Scholar

Goswami, U. (2015). Sensory theories of developmental dyslexia: three challenges for research. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16(1), 43–54.Google Scholar

Goswami, U., Thomson, J., Richardson, U. et al. (2002). Amplitude envelope onsets and developmental dyslexia: A new hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 99(16), 10911–10916.Google Scholar

Grainger, J., Dufau, S., & Ziegler, J. C. (2016). A vision of reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(3), 171–179.Google Scholar

Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). A dual-route approach to orthographic processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(45).Google Scholar

Griffiths, Y. M., & Snowling, M. (2002). Predictors of exception word and nonword reading in dyslexic children: The severity hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 34–43.CrossRef Google Scholar

Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1999). Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: Insights from connectionist models. Psychological Review, 106(3), 491–528.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111(3), 662–720.Google Scholar

Hawelka, S., Huber, C., & Wimmer, H. (2006). Impaired visual processing of letter and digit strings in adult dyslexic readers. Vision Research, 46(5), 718–723.Google Scholar

Kohnen, S., Nickels, L., Castles, A., Friedmann, N., & McArthur, G. (2012). When “slime” becomes “smile”: Developmental letter position dyslexia in English. Neuropsychologia, 50(14), 3681–3692.Google Scholar

Landerl, K., Ramus, F., Moll, K. et al. (2013). Predictors of developmental dyslexia in European orthographies with varying complexity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(6), 686–694.Google Scholar

Lyytinen, H., Ahonen, T., Eklund, K. et al. (2001). Developmental pathways of children with and without familial risk for dyslexia during the first years of life. Developmental Neuropsychology, 20(2), 535–554.Google Scholar

Manis, F. R., Seidenberg, M. S., & Doi, L. M. (1999). See Dick RAN: Rapid naming and the longitudinal prediction of reading subskills in first and second graders. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(2), 129–157.Google Scholar

McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An Interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88(5), 375–407.Google Scholar

Menghini, D., Finzi, A., Benassi, M. et al. (2010). Different underlying neurocognitive deficits in developmental dyslexia: a comparative study. Neuropsychologia, 48(4), 863–872.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Paulesu, E., Demonet, J. F., Fazio, F. et al. (2001). Dyslexia: Cultural diversity and biological unity. Science, 291(5511), 2165–2167.Google Scholar

Pennington, B. F. (2006). From single to multiple deficit models of developmental disorders. Cognition, 101(2), 385–413.Google Scholar

Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2007). Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 114(2), 273–315.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2010). Beyond single syllables: Large-scale modeling of reading aloud with the Connectionist Dual Process (CDP++) model. Cognitive Psychology, 61(2), 106–151.Google Scholar

Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2013). A computational and empirical investigation of graphemes in reading. Cognitive Science, 1–29.Google Scholar

Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2014a). CDP++.Italian: Modelling sublexical and supralexical inconsistency in a shallow orthography. PLoS One, 9(4),e94291.Google Scholar

Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2014b). When silent letters say more than a thousand words: An implementation and evaluation of CDP++ in French. Journal of Memory and Language, 72, 98–115.Google Scholar

Perry, C., Zorzi, M., & Ziegler, J. C. (2019). Understanding Dyslexia Through Personalized Large-Scale Computational Models. Psychological Science, 30(3), 386–395.Google Scholar

Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., & Patterson, K. (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological Review, 103(1), 56–115.Google Scholar

Ramus, F., & Ahissar, M. (2012). Developmental dyslexia: The difficulties of interpreting poor performance, and the importance of normal performance. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 29(1–2), 104–122.Google Scholar

Ramus, F., Rosen, S., & Dakin, S. C. et al. (2003). Theories of developmental dyslexia: insights from a multiple case study of dyslexic adults. Brain, 126, 841–865.Google Scholar

Saksida, A., Iannuzzi, S., Bogliotti, C. et al. (2016). Phonological skills, visual attention span, and visual stress in developmental dyslexia. Developmental Psychology, 52(10), 1503–1516.Google Scholar

Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96(4), 523–568.Google Scholar

Serniclaes, W., Van Heghe, S., Mousty, P., Carre, R., & Sprenger-Charolles, L. (2004). Allophonic mode of speech perception in dyslexia. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87(4), 336–361.Google Scholar

Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55(2), 151–218.Google Scholar

Sperling, A. J., Lu, Z. L., Manis, F. R., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2005). Deficits in perceptual noise exclusion in developmental dyslexia. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 862–863.Google Scholar

Sperling, A. J., Lu, Z. L., Manis, F. R., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2006). Motion-perception deficits and reading impairment: It’s the noise, not the motion. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1047–1053.CrossRef Google Scholar

Sprenger-Charolles, L., Cole, P., Lacert, P., & Serniclaes, W. (2000). On subtypes of developmental dyslexia: Evidence from processing time and accuracy scores. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 87–104.Google Scholar

Sprenger-Charolles, L., Siegel, L. S., Jimenez, J. E., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). Prevalence and reliability of phonological, surface, and mixed profiles in dyslexia: A review of studies conducted in languages varying in orthographic Depth. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(6), 498–521.Google Scholar

Stein, J. (2014). Dyslexia: The role of vision and visual attention. Current Developmental Disorders Reports, 1(4), 267–280.Google Scholar

Stein, J., & Walsh, V. (1997). To see but not to read: The magnocellular theory of dyslexia. Trends in Neurosciences, 20(4), 147–152.Google Scholar

Swan, D., & Goswami, U. (1997). Phonological awareness deficits in developmental dyslexia and the phonological representations hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66(1), 18–41.Google Scholar

Tallal, P., & Piercy, M. (1973). Defects of non-verbal auditory perception in children with developmental aphasia. Nature, 241(5390), 468–469.Google Scholar

van Bergen, E., van der Leij, A., & de Jong, P. F. (2014). The intergenerational multiple deficit model and the case of dyslexia. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8(346).CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Vandermosten, M., Boets, B., & Luts, H. et al. (2010). Adults with dyslexia are impaired in categorizing speech and nonspeech sounds on the basis of temporal cues. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(23), 10389–10394.Google Scholar

White, S., Milne, E., Rosen, S. et al. (2006). The role of sensorimotor impairments in dyslexia: A multiple case study of dyslexic children. Developmental Science, 9(3), 237–255.Google Scholar

Woollams, A. M. (2014). Connectionist neuropsychology: Uncovering ultimate causes of acquired dyslexia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B Biological Sciences, 369(1634), 20120398.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Woollams, A. M., Lambon Ralph, M. A., Plaut, D. C., & Patterson, K. (2007). SD-squared: On the association between semantic dementia and surface dyslexia. Psychological Review, 114(2), 316–339.Google Scholar

World Health Organization. (2011). International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems – 10th revision. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.Google Scholar

Ziegler, J. C. (2006). Do differences in brain activation challenge universal theories of dyslexia? Brain and Language, 98(3), 341–343.Google Scholar

Ziegler, J. C. (2008). Better to lose the anchor than the whole ship. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 244–245.Google Scholar

Ziegler, J. C., Bertrand, D., Tóth, D. et al. (2010). Orthographic depth and its impact on universal predictors of reading: A cross-language investigation. Psychological Science, 21(4), 551–559.Google Scholar

Ziegler, J. C., Castel, C., Pech-Georgel, C. et al. (2008). Developmental dyslexia and the dual route model of reading: Simulating individual differences and subtypes. Cognition, 107, 151–178.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ziegler, J. C., Pech-Georgel, C., Dufau, S., & Grainger, J. (2010). Rapid processing of letters, digits, and symbols: What purely visual-attentional deficit in developmental dyslexia? Developmental Science, 13, F8–F14.Google Scholar

Ziegler, J. C., Perry, C., Ma-Wyatt, A., Ladner, D., & Schulte-Korne, G. (2003). Developmental dyslexia in different languages: Language-specific or universal? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 86(3), 169–193.Google Scholar

Ziegler, J. C., Perry, C., & Zorzi, M. (2014). Modelling reading development through phonological decoding and self-teaching: Implications for dyslexia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B Biological Sciences, 369(1634), 20120397.Google Scholar

Zorzi, M. (2010). The connectionist dual process (CDP) approach to modelling reading aloud. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 836–860.Google Scholar

Zorzi, M., Barbiero, C., Facoetti, A. et al. (2012). Extra-large letter spacing improves reading in dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(28), 11455–11459.Google Scholar

Zorzi, M., Houghton, G., & Butterworth, B. (1998a). The development of spelling–sound relationships in a model of phonological reading. Language & Cognitive Processes, 13(2&3), 337–371.Google Scholar

Zorzi, M., Houghton, G., & Butterworth, B. (1998b). Two routes or one in reading aloud? A connectionist dual-process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24(4), 1131–1161.Google Scholar