Search

Competing theories of dyslexia posit that reading difficulties arise from impaired visual, auditory, phonological, or statistical learning mechanisms. Importantly, many theories posit that dyslexia reflects a cascade of impairments emanating from a single "core deficit". Here we report two studies evaluating core deficit and multifactorial models. In Study 1, we use publicly available data from the Healthy Brain Network to test the accuracy of phonological processing measures for predicting dyslexia diagnosis and find that over 30% of cases are misclassified (sensitivity = 66.7%; specificity = 68.2%). In Study 2, we collect a battery of psychophysical measures of visual motion processing and standardized measures of phonological processing in 106 school-aged children to investigate whether dyslexia is best conceptualized under a core-deficit model, or as a disorder with heterogenous origins. Specifically, by capitalizing on the drift diffusion model to analyze performance on a visual motion discrimination experiment, we show that deficits in visual motion processing, perceptual decision-making, and phonological processing manifest largely independently. Based on statistical models of how variance in reading skill is parceled across measures of visual processing, phonological processing, and decision-making, our results challenge the notion that a unifying deficit characterizes dyslexia. Instead, these findings indicate a model where reading skill is explained by several distinct, additive predictors, or risk factors, of reading (dis)ability., (© 2020 The Authors. Developmental Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Research shows that, on average, children with dyslexia behave less categorically in phoneme categorization tasks. This study investigates three subtle ways that struggling readers may perform differently than their typically developing peers in this experimental context: sensitivity to the frequency distribution from which speech tokens are drawn, bias induced by previous stimulus presentations, and fatigue during the course of the task. We replicate findings that reading skill is related to categorical labeling, but we do not find evidence that sensitivity to the stimulus frequency distribution, the influence of previous stimulus presentations, and a measure of task engagement differs in children with dyslexia. It is, therefore, unlikely that the reliable relationship between reading skill and categorical labeling is attributable to artifacts of the task design, abnormal neural encoding, or executive function. Rather, categorical labeling may index a general feature of linguistic development whose causal relationship to literacy remains to be ascertained.

It is established that individuals with dyslexia are less consistent at auditory phoneme categorization than typical readers. One hypothesis attributes these differences in phoneme labeling to differences in auditory cue integration over time, suggesting that the performance of individuals with dyslexia would improve with longer exposure to informative phonetic cues. Here, the relationship between phoneme labeling and reading ability was investigated while manipulating the duration of steady-state auditory information available in a consonant-vowel syllable. Children with dyslexia obtained no more benefit from longer cues than did children with typical reading skills, suggesting that poor task performance is not explained by deficits in temporal integration or temporal sampling.