ArticleBrain sciences2023
Hebbian Control of Fixations in a Dyslexic Reader: A Case Report.
Article in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correction: Le Floch, A.; Ropars, G. Hebbian Control of Fixations in a Dyslexic Reader: A Case Report.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Lexical word processing is unaffected by rapid invisible frequency tagging in reading: Evidence from eye movements.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Invited reply: Comment on 'Left-right asymmetry of the Maxwell spot centroids in adults without and with dyslexia'.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Hebbian Optocontrol of Cross-Modal Disruptive Reading in Increasing Acoustic Noise in an Adult with Developmental Coordination Disorder: A Case Report.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Pulsed lighting for adults with Dyslexia: very limited impact, confined to individuals with severe reading deficits.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When reading, dyslexic readers exhibit more and longer fixations than normal readers. However, there is no significant difference when dyslexic and control readers perform only visual tasks on a string of letters, showing the importance of cognitive processes in reading. This linguistic and cognitive processing requirement in reading is often perturbed for dyslexic readers by perceived additional letters and word mirror images superposed on the primary images on the primary cortex, inducing internal visual crowding. Here, we show that while for a normal reader, the number and the duration of fixations remain invariant whatever the nature of the lighting, the excess of fixations and total duration of reading can be controlled for a dyslexic reader using the Hebbian mechanisms to erase extra images in optimized pulse-width lighting. In this case, the number of fixations can then be reduced by a factor of about 1.8, recovering the normal reading experiment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.