An investigation of white matter properties as they relate to spelling behaviour in skilled and impaired readers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the extent to which white matter is related to spelling behaviour in adults with skilled vs. impaired literacy skills. Adults (N = 30; 17 skilled) completed a battery of spelling tasks and underwent a brain scan to measure diffusion properties of white matter tracts, namely the arcuate fasciculus, inferior longitudinal fasciculus, inferior frontal occipital fasciculus and uncinate fasciculus. Regression analyses and between groups tests of correlation strength were run.Results While the inferior longitudinal fasciculus was more strongly related to spelling behaviour in skilled adults, the uncinate fasciculus was more strongly related to spelling behaviour in impaired adults. We found strong left lateralization of the arcuate fasciculus and inferior longitudinal fasciculus in both groups. However, lateralization of the inferior frontal occipital fasciculus was more strongly related to spelling response time behaviour in skilled adults, whereas lateralization of the uncinate fasciculus was more strongly related to spelling accuracy behaviour in the impaired adults.Conclusion This study provides some useful information for understanding the underlying white matter pathways that support spelling in skilled and impaired adults and underscore the advantage of adopting multiple spelling tasks and outcomes (i.e., response time and accuracy) to better characterize brain-behaviour relationships in skilled and impaired adults.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".