Dyscalculia and dyslexia: Different behavioral, yet similar brain activity profiles during arithmetic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain disorders are often investigated in isolation, but very different conclusions might be reached when studies directly contrast multiple disorders. Here, we illustrate this in the context of specific learning disorders, such as dyscalculia and dyslexia. While children with dyscalculia show deficits in arithmetic, children with dyslexia present with reading difficulties. Furthermore, the comorbidity between dyslexia and dyscalculia is surprisingly high. Different hypotheses have been proposed on the origin of these disorders (number processing deficits in dyscalculia, phonological deficits in dyslexia) but these have never been directly contrasted in one brain imaging study. Therefore, we compared the brain activity of children with dyslexia, children with dyscalculia, children with comorbid dyslexia/dyscalculia and healthy controls during arithmetic in a design that allowed us to disentangle various processes that might be associated with the specific or common neural origins of these learning disorders. Participants were 62 children aged 9 to 12, 39 of whom had been clinically diagnosed with a specific learning disorder (dyscalculia and/or dyslexia). All children underwent fMRI scanning while performing an arithmetic task in different formats (dot arrays, digits and number words). At the behavioral level, children with dyscalculia showed lower accuracy when subtracting dot arrays, and all children with learning disorders were slower in responding compared to typically developing children (especially in symbolic formats). However, at the neural level, analyses pointed towards substantial neural similarity between children with learning disorders: Control children demonstrated higher activation levels in frontal and parietal areas than the three groups of children with learning disorders, regardless of the disorder. A direct comparison between the groups of children with learning disorders revealed similar levels of neural activation throughout the brain across these groups. Multivariate subject generalization analyses were used to statistically test the degree of similarity, and confirmed that the neural activation patterns of children with dyslexia, dyscalculia and dyslexia/dyscalculia were highly similar in how they deviated from neural activation patterns in control children. Collectively, these results suggest that, despite differences at the behavioral level, the brain activity profiles of children with different learning disorders during arithmetic may be more similar than initially thought.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".