MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2966036445

Functional and structural neural contributions to skilled word reading

2019· dissertation· en· W2966036445 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Chelsea Ekstrand

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiqueNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Mots-clésReading (process)Word (group theory)Computer scienceLinguisticsPsychologyNatural language processingArtificial intelligencePhilosophy
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reading is an essential skill in our everyday lives and individuals are required to process, understand, and respond to textual information at an increasingly rapid rate in order to be active participants in society. The role of spatial attention in reading has recently been emphasized, whereby better spatial attentional skills are associated with stronger reading skills, and spatial attentional training has a large impact on improving reading ability. However, the neuroanatomical correlates of reading and attention have primarily been studied in isolation. Further, there has recently been a shift to understanding how underlying white matter connectivity networks contribute to cognitive processes. However, much of the research focusing on the intersection of reading and spatial attention, as well as underlying white matter connectivity, has focused primarily on individuals with reading impairments. This thesis will focus on unraveling the neural relationship between spatial attention and reading, and how structural connectivity accounts for functional activation in reading tasks. In Chapter 2, we examine the neural relationship between lexical and sublexical reading with voluntary and reflexive spatial attention. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants performed overt reading of both lexical exception word (EW; words with inconsistent spelling-to-sound correspondences, e.g., ‘pint’) and sublexical pseudohomophone (PH; non-words that when decoded phonetically sound like real words, e.g., ‘pynt’) reading tasks, as well as tasks involving either voluntary attention (Experiment 1) or reflexive attention (Experiment 2) during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Experiment 3 used hybrid combined reading attention tasks during fMRI, whereby the spatial attentional cue preceded presentation of the EW or PH stimulus. Overall, the results from these experiments showed that sublexical reading was more strongly associated with brain regions involved in voluntary attention, whereas lexical reading was more strongly associated with brain regions involved in reflexive attention. Thus, Experiments 1, 2 and 3 lend support to the idea that lexical and sublexical reading strategies are differentially associated with these two types of attention. In Chapter 3, we examined the extent to which fine-grained underlying white matter connectivity is able to predict fMRI activation during both lexical reading and phonetic decoding in skilled readers. Experiment 4 employed EW and PH reading and a computational modeling technique to model the relationship between whole-brain structural DTI connectivity and task-based fMRI activation during lexical and sublexical reading. Results from this study showed that brain activation during both lexical and sublexical reading in skilled readers can be accurately predicted using DTI connectivity, specifically in known reading and language areas, as well as important spatial attentional areas. Thus, this research suggests that there is a fine-grained relationship between skilled reading and extrinsic brain connectivity, showing that functional organization of reading and language can be determined (at least in part) by structural connectivity patterns. Together, the studies presented in this thesis provide valuable insight into functional and structural contributions to word reading that may serve as biomarkers of skilled reading, which in turn may have important implications for understanding and remediating reading impairments.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,395
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,314
Écart entre enseignants0,292 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionTravaux en français237 207