Objectives: According to the Procedural Deficit Hypothesis, abnormalities in corticostriatal pathways could account for the language-related deficits observed in developmental dyslexia. The same neural network has also been implicated in the ability to learn contingencies based on trial and error (i.e., reinforcement learning [RL]). On this basis, the present study tested the assumption that dyslexic individuals would be impaired in RL compared with neurotypicals in two different tasks. Methods: In a probabilistic selection task, participants were required to learn reinforcement contingencies based on probabilistic feedback. In an implicit transitive inference task, participants were also required to base their decisions on reinforcement histories, but feedback was deterministic and stimulus pairs were partially overlapping, such that participants were required to learn hierarchical relations. Results: Across tasks, results revealed that although the ability to learn from positive/negative feedback did not differ between the two groups, the learning of reinforcement contingencies was poorer in the dyslexia group compared with the neurotypicals group. Furthermore, in novel test pairs where previously learned information was presented in new combinations, dyslexic individuals performed similarly to neurotypicals. Conclusions: Taken together, these results suggest that learning of reinforcement contingencies occurs less robustly in individuals with developmental dyslexia. Inferences for the neuro-cognitive mechanisms of developmental dyslexia are discussed.

Background Theoretical models posit abnormalities in cortico-striatal pathways in two of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders (Developmental dyslexia, DD, and Attention deficit hyperactive disorder, ADHD), but it is still unclear what distinct cortico-striatal dysfunction might distinguish language disorders from others that exhibit very different symptomatology. Although impairments in tasks that depend on the cortico-striatal network, including reinforcement learning (RL), have been implicated in both disorders, there has been little attempt to dissociate between different types of RL or to compare learning processes in these two types of disorders. The present study builds upon prior research indicating the existence of two learning manifestations of RL and evaluates whether these processes can be differentiated in language and attention deficit disorders. We used a two-step RL task shown to dissociate model-based from model-free learning in human learners. Results Our results show that, relative to neurotypicals, DD individuals showed an impairment in model-free but not in model-based learning, whereas in ADHD the ability to use both model-free and model-based learning strategies was significantly compromised. Conclusions Thus, learning impairments in DD may be linked to a selective deficit in the ability to form action-outcome associations based on previous history, whereas in ADHD some learning deficits may be related to an incapacity to pursue rewards based on the tasks' structure. Our results indicate how different patterns of learning deficits may underlie different disorders, and how computation-minded experimental approaches can differentiate between them.