MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283740733 · doi:10.15540/nr.9.2.98

Limited Visual Working Memory Capacity in Children with Dyslexia: An ERP Study

2022· article· en· W4283740733 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroRegulation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDyslexiaWorking memoryPsychologyEvent-related potentialOddball paradigmCognitive psychologyCognitionTask (project management)Latency (audio)Biological theories of dyslexiaAudiologyDevelopmental psychologyDevelopmental dyslexiaComputer scienceNeuroscienceReading (process)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some researchers suggest that deficits in attention and working memory influence the development of dyslexia, whereas others propose that these deficits are more likely due to reduced global processing speed. The current study aimed to investigate behavioral performance in children with dyslexia compared to typically developing controls on two tasks: a visual oddball task for attention and an n-back task for working memory. We measured P300 event-related potentials (ERP) amplitude and latency for both tasks. Our results demonstrated reduced behavioral accuracy and P300 amplitude for the children with dyslexia compared to their typically developing peers in both the n-back and visual oddball tasks. We also found no differences in response time or P300 latency between these groups on either task. These findings support the idea that children with dyslexia experience deficits in cognitive processes related to working memory and attention, but do not exhibit decreased global processing speed on these tasks.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.189
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.161 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it