ArticleNPJ science of learning2025
Computational markers show specific deficits for dyslexia and ADHD in complex learning settings.
Article in NPJ science of learning, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid decay of perceptual memory in dyslexia.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2026Review
- Category learning difficulties in ADHD across modalities and multiple learning systems.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current study examined how individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders navigate the complexities of learning within multidimensional environments marked by uncertain dimension values and without explicit guidance. Participants engaged in a game-like complex reinforcement learning task in which the stimuli dimension determining reward remained undisclosed, necessitating that participants discover which dimension should be prioritized for detecting the maximum reward. For comparison, a control condition featuring a simple reinforcement learning task was included in which the predictive dimension was explicitly revealed. The findings showed that individuals with ADHD and dyslexia exhibited reduced performance across both tasks compared to their controls. Computational modeling revealed that relative to controls, participants with ADHD exhibited a markedly decreased ability to utilize demanding yet more optimal Bayesian inference strategies, whereas participants with dyslexia demonstrated heightened decay rates, indicating quicker discounting of recently learned associations. These findings illuminate different computational markers of neurodevelopmental disorders in naturalistic learning contexts.
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.