Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36248689›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2022

Is there evidence for a noisy computation deficit in developmental dyslexia?

Yufei Tan, Valérie Chanoine, Eddy Cavalli, Jean-Luc Anton, Johannes C Ziegler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yufei TanCNRS, Laboratoire de Psychologie Cognitive (UMR 7290), Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Valérie ChanoineInstitute of Language, Communication and the Brain, Aix-Marseille University, Aix-en-Provence, France.
Eddy CavalliLaboratoire d'Étude des Mécanismes Cognitifs (EA 3082), Université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon, France.
Jean-Luc AntonCNRS, Institut des Neurosciences de la Timone (UMR 7289), Centre IRM-INT@CERIMED, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Johannes C ZieglerCNRS, Laboratoire de Psychologie Cognitive (UMR 7290), Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The noisy computation hypothesis of developmental dyslexia (DD) is particularly appealing because it can explain deficits across a variety of domains, such as temporal, auditory, phonological, visual and attentional processes. A key prediction is that noisy computations lead to more variable and less stable word representations. A way to test this hypothesis is through repetition of words, that is, when there is noise in the system, the neural signature of repeated stimuli should be more variable. The hypothesis was tested in an functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment with dyslexic and typical readers by repeating words twelve times. Variability measures were computed both at the behavioral and neural levels. At the behavioral level, we compared the standard deviation of reaction time distributions of repeated words. At the neural level, in addition to standard univariate analyses and measures of intra-item variability, we also used multivariate pattern analyses (representational similarity and classification) to find out whether there was evidence for noisier representations in dyslexic readers compared to typical readers. Results showed that there were no significant differences between the two groups in any of the analyses despite robust results within each group (i.e., high representational similarity between repeated words, good classification of words vs. non-words). In summary, there was no evidence in favor of the idea that dyslexic readers would have noisier neural representations than typical readers.

Indexed as

dyslexiafMRIneural adaptationneural noiserepetition

Identifiers

PMID36248689
PMCPMC9561132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.