Développement d'un instrument multimédia de remédiation de la dyslexie

Présentation d'un outil de remédiation de la perception catégorielle, déficitaire chez les enfants dyslexiques. Présentation de la méthode et des résultats

Development of phonological and orthographic processing in reading aloud, in silent reading, and in spelling: a four-year longitudinal study.

International audienceThe development of phonological and orthographic processing was studied from the middle of Grade 1 to the end of Grade 4 (age 6; 6-10 years) using the effects of regularity and of lexicality in reading aloud and in spelling tasks, and using the effect of pseudohomophony in a silent reading task. In all the tasks, signs of reliance on phonological processing were found even when indicators of reliance on orthographic processing appeared. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to determine which early skills predict later reading achievement. Pseudoword and irregular word scores were used as measures for phonological and orthographic skills, respectively. Only middle of Grade 1 phonological reading skills accounted for independent variance in end of Grade 4 orthographic skills. Conversely, from the middle to the end of Grade 1, and from the end of Grade 1 to the end of Grade 4, both orthographic and phonological skills accounted for independent variance in later orthographic skills. In the prediction of phonological skills, only the unique contribution of earlier phonological skills was significant. Thus, phonological and orthographic processing appear to be reciprocally related, rather than independent components of written word recognition. However, very early reliance on the phonological procedure seems to be the bootstrapping mechanism for reading acquisition

Brain classification reveals the right cerebellum as the best biomarker of dyslexia

Background Developmental dyslexia is a specific cognitive disorder in reading acquisition that has genetic and neurological origins. Despite histological evidence for brain differences in dyslexia, we recently demonstrated that in large cohort of subjects, no differences between control and dyslexic readers can be found at the macroscopic level (MRI voxel), because of large variances in brain local volumes. In the present study, we aimed at finding brain areas that most discriminate dyslexic from control normal readers despite the large variance across subjects. After segmenting brain grey matter, normalizing brain size and shape and modulating the voxels' content, normal readers' brains were used to build a 'typical' brain via bootstrapped confidence intervals. Each dyslexic reader's brain was then classified independently at each voxel as being within or outside the normal range. We used this simple strategy to build a brain map showing regional percentages of differences between groups. The significance of this map was then assessed using a randomization technique. Results The right cerebellar declive and the right lentiform nucleus were the two areas that significantly differed the most between groups with 100% of the dyslexic subjects (N = 38) falling outside of the control group (N = 39) 95% confidence interval boundaries. The clinical relevance of this result was assessed by inquiring cognitive brain-based differences among dyslexic brain subgroups in comparison to normal readers' performances. The strongest difference between dyslexic subgroups was observed between subjects with lower cerebellar declive (LCD) grey matter volumes than controls and subjects with higher cerebellar declive (HCD) grey matter volumes than controls. Dyslexic subjects with LCD volumes performed worse than subjects with HCD volumes in phonologically and lexicon related tasks. Furthermore, cerebellar and lentiform grey matter volumes interacted in dyslexic subjects, so that lower and higher lentiform grey matter volumes compared to controls differently modulated the phonological and lexical performances. Best performances (observed in controls) corresponded to an optimal value of grey matter and they dropped for higher or lower volumes. Conclusion These results provide evidence for the existence of various subtypes of dyslexia characterized by different brain phenotypes. In addition, behavioural analyses suggest that these brain phenotypes relate to different deficits of automatization of language-based processes such as grapheme/phoneme correspondence and/or rapid access to lexicon entries. article available here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/10/6

A neural oscillations perspective on phonological development and phonological processing in developmental dyslexia

Children’s ability to reflect upon and manipulate the sounds in words (’phonological awareness’) develops as part of natural language acquisition, supports reading acquisition, and develops further as reading and spelling are learned. Children with developmental dyslexia typically have impairments in phonological awareness. Many developmental factors contribute to individual differences in phonological development. One important source of individual differences may be the child’s sensory/neural processing of the speech signal from an amplitude modulation (~ energy or intensity variation) perspective, which may affect the quality of the sensory/neural representations (’phonological representations’) that support phonological awareness. During speech encoding, brain electrical rhythms (oscillations, rhythmic variations in neural excitability) re-calibrate their temporal activity to be in time with rhythmic energy variations in the speech signal. The accuracy of this neural alignment or ’entrainment’ process is related to speech intelligibility. Recent neural studies demonstrate atypical oscillatory function at slower rates in children with developmental dyslexia. Potential relations with the development of phonological awareness by children with dyslexia are discussed.Medical Research Council, G0400574 and G090237

Sensory theories of developmental dyslexia: three challenges for research.

Recent years have seen the publication of a range of new theories suggesting that the basis of dyslexia might be sensory dysfunction. In this Opinion article, the evidence for and against several prominent sensory theories of dyslexia is closely scrutinized. Contrary to the causal claims being made, my analysis suggests that many proposed sensory deficits might result from the effects of reduced reading experience on the dyslexic brain. I therefore suggest that longitudinal studies of sensory processing, beginning in infancy, are required to successfully identify the neural basis of developmental dyslexia. Such studies could have a powerful impact on remediation.This is the accepted manuscript. The final version is available from NPG at http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v16/n1/abs/nrn3836.html

Allophonic perception of VOT contrasts in Spanish children with dyslexia

French National Research Agency; MINECO/FEDER, Grant/Award Number: PSI2015-65848-R and PGC2018-098813-B-C32; JUNTA DE ANDALUCIA/FEDER, Grant/Award Number: P18-RT-1624Introduction Previous studies have evidenced a different mode of speech perception in dyslexia, characterized by the use of allophonic rather than phonemic units. People with dyslexia perceive phonemic features (such as voicing) less accurately than typical readers, but they perceive allophonic features (i.e., language-independent differences between speech sounds) more accurately. Method In this study, we investigated the perception of voicing contrasts in a sample of 204 Spanish children with or without dyslexia. Identification and discrimination data were collected for synthetic sounds varying along three different voice onset time (VOT) continua (ba/pa, de/te, and di/ti). Empirical data will be contrasted with a mathematical model of allophonic perception building up from neural oscillations and auditory temporal processing. Results Children with dyslexia exhibited a general deficit in categorical precision; that is, they discriminated among phonemically contrastive pairs (around 0-ms VOT) less accurately than did chronological age controls, irrespective of the stimulus continuum. Children with dyslexia also exhibited a higher sensitivity in the discrimination of allophonic features (around +/- 30-ms VOT), but only for the stimulus continuum that was based on a nonlexical contrast (ba/pa). Conclusion Fitting the neural network model to the data collected for this continuum suggests that allophonic perception is due to a deficit in "subharmonic coupling" between high-frequency oscillations. Relationships with "temporal sampling framework" theory are discussed.French National Research Agency (ANR)MINECO/FEDER PSI2015-65848-R PGC2018-098813-B-C32Junta de Andalucia European Commission P18-RT-162

Deviant neural processing of phonotactic probabilities in adults with dyslexia

Item does not contain fulltextDuring language acquisition in the first year of life, children become sensitive to phonotactic probabilities such as the likelihood of speech sound occurrences in the ambient language. Because this sensitivity is acquired at an early age, the extent to which the neural system that underlies speech processing in adults is tuned to these phonological regularities can reflect difficulties in processing language-specific phonological regularities that can persist into adulthood. Here, we examined the neural processing of phonotactic probabilities in 18 adults with dyslexia and 18 non-dyslexic controls using mismatch negativity, a pre-attentive neurophysiological response. Stimuli that differed in phonotactic probability elicited similar mismatch negativity responses among the adults with dyslexia, whereas the controls responded more strongly to stimuli with a high phonotactic probability than to stimuli with a low phonotactic probability, suggesting that controls – but not adults with dyslexia – are sensitive to the phonological regularities of the ambient language. These findings suggest that the underlying neural system in adults with dyslexia is not properly tuned to language-specific phonological regularities, which may partially account for the phonological deficits that are often reported in dyslexic individuals