Electrophysiological Indices of Phonological Impairments in Dyslexia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A range of studies have shown difficulties in perceiving acoustic and phonetic information in dyslexia; however, much less is known about how such difficulties relate to the perception of individual words. The authors present data from event-related potentials (ERPs) examining the hypothesis that children with dyslexia have difficulties with processing phonemic information within spoken words compared to age-matched readers with typical development. METHOD: The authors monitored ERPs to auditory words during a simple picture-word matching task. The key manipulation was the inclusion of both matching stimuli and three types of mismatches (cohort, CONE-comb; rhyme, CONE-bone; and unrelated, CONE-fox). RESULTS: Children with dyslexia showed atypical N400 ERP waveforms to both types of phonological mismatches, but not to phonologically unrelated mismatches, reflecting a relative insensitivity to phonological overlap among auditory words. CONCLUSION: The data suggest that children with dyslexia have impairments in integrating phonological information into word-level representations. The results suggest that speech perception difficulties in dyslexia might have consequences for processing auditory words.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".