2004
DOI: 10.1002/dys.276
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Auditory processing skills and phonological representation in Dyslexic children

Abstract: It is now well-established that there is a causal connection between children's phonological skills and their acquisition of reading and spelling. Here we study low-level auditory processes that may underpin the development of phonological representations in children. Dyslexic and control children were given a battery of phonological tasks, reading and spelling tasks and auditory processing tasks. Potential relations between deficits in dyslexic performance in the auditory processing tasks and phonological awa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

20
201
6
8

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 200 publications
(241 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
(62 reference statements)
20
201
6
8
Order By: Relevance
“…On the basis of prior behavioural work (Goswami et al, 2002(Goswami et al, , 2010bHämäläinen et al, 2009;Muneaux et al, 2004;Richardson et al, 2004;Surányi et al, 2009), we expected group effects to be strongest for rise time, however this was not the case. Rather, the most conservative explanation of the ERPs is that children with dyslexia have general differences in auditory neural processing in comparison to children of the same age who do not have dyslexia.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…On the basis of prior behavioural work (Goswami et al, 2002(Goswami et al, , 2010bHämäläinen et al, 2009;Muneaux et al, 2004;Richardson et al, 2004;Surányi et al, 2009), we expected group effects to be strongest for rise time, however this was not the case. Rather, the most conservative explanation of the ERPs is that children with dyslexia have general differences in auditory neural processing in comparison to children of the same age who do not have dyslexia.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Discrimination of rise, intensity and duration was designed to be close to normative behavioural thresholds in previous experiments (Richardson et al, 2004;Thomson and Goswami, 2008;Goswami et al, 2010a,b), in order to avoid supra-threshold effects on the MMN which may obscure differences between the groups. As can be seen by comparing Table 1 with Supplemental Table 1, the discriminations chosen were however sub-threshold for normative rise time discrimination for this particular group of participants at test point 1 (control threshold, 95 ms) although not at test point 2 (control threshold, 45 ms), were sub-threshold for normative intensity discrimination at test point 1 (control threshold 4 dB) but not test point 2 (control threshold 4 dB), and were sub-threshold for normative duration discrimination at both test points (control thresholds 92 ms and 87 ms respectively).…”
Section: Stimuli and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations