No abstract

The recognition of dyslexia as a neurodevelopmental disorder has been hampered by the belief that it is not a specific diagnostic entity because it has variable and culture-specific manifestations. In line with this belief, we found that Italian dyslexics, using a shallow orthography which facilitates reading, performed better on reading tasks than did English and French dyslexics. However, all dyslexics were equally impaired relative to their controls on reading and phonological tasks. Positron emission tomography scans during explicit and implicit reading showed the same reduced activity in a region of the left hemisphere in dyslexics from all three countries, with the maximum peak in the middle temporal gyrus and additional peaks in the inferior and superior temporal gyri and middle occipital gyrus. We conclude that there is a universal neurocognitive basis for dyslexia and that differences in reading performance among dyslexics of different countries are due to different orthographies.

We present behavioral and anatomical evidence for a multi-component reading system in which different components are differentially weighted depending on culture-specific demands of orthography. Italian orthography is consistent, enabling reliable conversion of graphemes to phonemes to yield correct pronunciation of the word. English orthography is inconsistent, complicating mapping of letters to word sounds. In behavioral studies, Italian students showed faster word and non-word reading than English students. In two PET studies, Italians showed greater activation in left superior temporal regions associated with phoneme processing. In contrast, English readers showed greater activations, particularly for non-words, in left posterior inferior temporal gyrus and anterior inferior frontal gyrus, areas associated with word retrieval during both reading and naming tasks.

Two groups of male university students who had been diagnosed as dyslexic when younger, and two groups of control subjects of similar age and IQ to the dyslexics, were scanned whilst reading aloud and during a task where reading was implicit. The dyslexics performed less well than their peers on a range of literacy tasks and were strikingly impaired on phonological tasks. In the reading aloud experiment, simple words and pseudowords were presented at a slow pace so that reading accuracy was equal for dyslexics and controls. Relative to rest, both normal and dyslexic groups activated the same peri- and extra-sylvian regions of the left hemisphere that are known to be involved in reading. However, the dyslexic readers showed less activation than controls in the left posterior inferior temporal cortex [Brodmann area (BA) 37, or Wernicke's Wortschatz], left cerebellum, left thalamus and medial extrastriate cortex. In the implicit reading experiment, word and pseudoword processing was contrasted to visually matched false fonts while subjects performed a feature detection paradigm. The dyslexic readers showed reduced activation in BA 37 relative to normals suggesting that this group difference, seen in both experiments, resides in highly automated aspects of the reading process. Since BA 37 has been implicated previously in modality-independent naming, the reduced activation may indicate a specific impairment in lexical retrieval. Interestingly, during the reading aloud experiment only, there was increased activation for the dyslexics relative to the controls in a pre-motor region of Broca's area (BA 6/44). We attribute this result to the enforced use of an effortful compensatory strategy involving sublexical assembly of articulatory routines. The results confirm previous findings that dyslexic readers process written stimuli atypically, based on abnormal functioning of the left hemisphere reading system. More specifically, we localize this deficit to the neural system underlying lexical retrieval.

No abstract

Some art students, despite being at art school, cannot draw very well, and would like to be able to draw well. It has been suggested that poor drawing may be a particular problem for students with dyslexia (and a high proportion of art school students is dyslexic). In Study 1 we studied 277 art students, using a questionnaire to assess self-perceived drawing ability and a range of background measures, including demography, education, a history of dyslexia, a self-administered spelling test, and personality and educational variables. In Study 2 we gave detailed drawing tests to a sample of 38 of the art students, stratified by self-rated drawing ability and spelling ability, and to 30 control participants. Students perceiving themselves as good at drawing did indeed draw better than self-perceived poor drawers, although the latter were still better than non-art student controls. In neither Study 1 nor Study 2 did skill at drawing relate to dyslexia or spelling ability, and neither did drawing ability relate to any of our wide range of background measures. However Study 2 did show that drawing ability was related both to ability at copying simple angles and proportions (using the "house" task of Cain, 1943), and also to visual memory (as suggested by Jones, 1922), poor drawers being less good at both immediate and delayed recall of the Rey-Osterrieth complex figure.

Individuals with drawing talent have previously been shown to exhibit enhanced local visual processing ability. The aim of the current study was to assess whether local processing biases associated with drawing ability result from a reduced ability to cohere local stimuli into global forms, or an increased ability to disregard global aspects of an image. Local and global visual processing ability was assessed in art students and controls using the Group Embedded Figures Task, Navon shape stimuli, the Block Design Task and the Autism Spectrum Quotient, whilst controlling for nonverbal IQ and artistic ability. Local processing biases associated with drawing appear to arise from an enhancement of local processing alongside successful filtering of global information, rather than a reduction in global processing. The relationship between local processing and drawing ability is independent of individual differences in nonverbal IQ and artistic ability. These findings have implications for bottom-up and attentional theories of observational drawing, as well as explanations of special skills in autism.

No abstract