Developmental dyslexia is a common reading disorder that negatively impacts an individual's ability to achieve literacy. Although the brain network involved in reading and its dysfunction in dyslexia has been well studied, it is unknown whether dyslexia is caused by structural abnormalities in the reading network itself or in the lower-level networks that provide input to the reading network. In this study, we acquired structural magnetic resonance imaging scans longitudinally from 27 Norwegian children from before formal literacy training began until after dyslexia was diagnosed. Thus, we were able to determine that the primary neuroanatomical abnormalities that precede dyslexia are not in the reading network itself, but rather in lower-level areas responsible for auditory and visual processing and core executive functions. Abnormalities in the reading network itself were only observed at age 11, after children had learned how to read. The findings suggest that abnormalities in the reading network are the consequence of having different reading experiences, rather than dyslexia per se, whereas the neuroanatomical precursors are predominantly in primary sensory cortices.

This study focused on executive functions in dyslexia. A group of 43 heavily-affected young dyslexics, divided into two groups based on the results of a receptive language test, and 20 non-dyslexic controls, were tested with a Dichotic Listening Test, the Stroop Color Word Test and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. The dyslexic subjects demonstrated significant impairment on all tasks, but with different patterns of impairment according to the subgrouping. The subgroups were equally impaired on the Dichotic Listening Test, but differed on the Stroop and the Wisconsin Tests. The data support a hypothesis suggesting executive problems in dyslexia, depending on receptive language skills.

This study focused on English as L2 in a group of Norwegian dyslexic 12 year olds, compared to an age and gender matched control group. Norwegian school children learn English from the first grades on. The subjects were assessed with a test battery of verbal and written tasks. First, they were given a comprehension task; second, a model sentence task; third, two pragmatic tasks, and fourth, three tasks of literacy. The verbal tasks were scored according to comprehension, morphology, syntax and semantics, while the literacy tasks were scored by spelling, translation and reading skills. It was hypothesized that the results of the control group and the dyslexia group would differ on all tasks, but that subgrouping the dyslexia group by comprehension skills would show heterogeneity within the dyslexia group. The data analyses confirmed these hypotheses. Significant differences were seen between the dyslexia group and the control group. However, the subgrouping revealed minor differences between the control group and the subgroup with good comprehension skills, and major differences between the control group and the subgroup with poor comprehension skills. Especially morphology and spelling were difficult for the dyslexia group. The results were tentatively discussed within the framework of biological and cognitive models of how to interpret L2 performance in dyslexia, underlining the importance of further research in L2 acquisition in dyslexia.

The aim of this study was to investigate digit span performance in dyslexia. It was hypothesised that differences would be found in accordance with subgrouping by language comprehension and mathematic skills, and by analyses of how the digit span scores were attained. Two digit span tasks were given to a group of dyslexic children and controls (n = 57), mean age 12.62 (SD = 1.43). The tasks were "Digit Span" of the WISC-R, and "Digit Span 2," where the use of back-up strategies like finger counting and lip reading were restricted. As expected, the digit span scores were significantly lower in the dyslexia group than in the control group. Restrictions of back-up strategies did not alter the scores in the control group, while the scores were lowered in the dyslexia group. Further analyses of longest digit span, serial recall, and serial position indicated different retrieval patterns in the subgroups. The subgroup with good language comprehension and mathematic skills (n = 12), showed impaired serial recall especially in backward recall. The subgroup with good language comprehension skills, but with mathematics impairment (n = 9), showed impaired serial recall in both forward and backward recall. The subgroup with language impairments (n = 16), recalled fewer digits than the two other subgroups. The findings were discussed in relation to the "Phonological loop" of the Multi Component Model of Working Memory, and implications for intervention were discussed.

Dyslexia is a literacy disorder affecting the efficient acquisition of reading and writing skills. The disorder is neurobiological in origin. Due to its developmental nature, longitudinal studies of dyslexia are of essence. They are, however, relatively scarce. The present study took a longitudinal approach to cortical connectivity of brain imaging data in reading tasks in children with dyslexia and children with typical reading development. The participants were followed with repeated measurements through Pre-literacy (6 years old), Emergent Literacy (8 years old) and Literacy (12 years old) stages, using Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM) when analysing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. Even though there are a few longitudinal studies on effective connectivity in typical reading, to our knowledge, no studies have previously investigated these issues in relation to dyslexia. We set up a model of a brain reading network involving five cortical regions (inferior frontal gyrus, precentral gyrus, superior temporal gyrus, inferior parietal lobule, and occipito-temporal cortex). Using DCM, connectivity measures were calculated for each connection in the model. These measures were further analysed using factorial ANOVA. The results showed that the difference between groups centred on connections going to and from the inferior frontal gyrus (two connections) and the occipito-temporal cortex (three connections). For all five connections, the typical group showed stable or decreasing connectivity measures. The dyslexia group, on the other hand, showed a marked up-regulation (occipito-temporal connections) or down-regulation (inferior frontal gyrus connections) from 6 years to 8 years, followed by normalization from 8 years to 12 years. We interpret this as a delay in the dyslexia group in developing into the Pre-literacy and Emergent literacy stages. This delay could possibly be detrimental to literacy development. By age 12, there was no statistically significant difference in connectivity between the groups, but differences in literacy skills were still present, and were in fact larger than when measured at younger ages.

Research on dyslexia has largely centred on reading. The aim of this study was to assess the writing of 13 children with and 28 without dyslexia at age 11 years. A programme for keystroke logging was used to allow recording of typing activity as the children performed a sentence dictation task. Five sentences were read aloud twice each. The task was to type the sentence as correctly as possible, with no time constraints. The data were analysed from a product (spelling, grammar and semantics) and process (transcription fluency and revisions) perspective, using repeated measures ANOVA and t-tests to investigate group differences. Furthermore, the data were correlated with measures of rapid automatic naming and working memory. Results showed that the group with dyslexia revised their texts as much as the typical group, but they used more time, and the result was poorer. Moreover, rapid automatic naming correlated with transcription fluency, and working memory correlated with the number of semantic errors. This shows that dyslexia is generally not an issue of effort and that cognitive skills that are known to be important for reading also affect writing.

In this fMRI-study, 6-year-old children considered at risk for dyslexia were compared with an age-/gender-matched control group for differences in brain activation when presented with visual stimuli differing in demands for literacy processing. Stimuli were nameable pictures, brand logos familiar to children, and written words - these were either regularly spelled using early-acquired rules ("alphabetic") or more complex ("orthographic"). Brain responses distinguished between the presentation conditions, as a function of group, within many cortical areas. Activation in the alphabetic and orthographic conditions in the left angular gyrus correlated with individual at-risk index scores, and activation in inferior occipito-temporal regions further indicated differential activation for the two groups related to orthographic processing, especially. Since similar patterns are reported in adult dyslexics when processing written words, it appears that sensitivity to the cortical differentiation of reading networks is established prior to formal literacy training.

Objective: The aims of the present study was to investigate communication impairments in a Norwegian sample of children with ADHD and children with Asperger syndrome (AS) and to explore whether children with ADHD can be differentiated from children with AS in terms of their language profiles on the Norwegian adaptation of the Children’s Communication Checklist Second Edition (CCC-2). Method: The CCC-2 was completed by the parents, and altogether, 77 children aged between 6 and 15 years participated in the study. Results: Communication impairments were as common in a group of children with ADHD as in a group of children with AS. Although a similar pattern appeared on most CCC-2 scales, children with ADHD and children with AS could be distinguished from each other in terms of their language profiles on the subscales assessing stereotyped language and nonverbal communication. Conclusion: Language abilities should be taken into account when standard assessments of ADHD and AS are performed and before therapies are initiated.