Untitled

Breznitz, Zvia; Berman, Lauren

doi:10.1023/a:1024696101081

Cited by 40 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Competing theories still debate on the precise initial recognition process of printed and spoken words, however, data shows that both reading and listening are incremental and largely a serial processes (Rayner et al, 2009; review by Carreiras et al, 2014). Nevertheless, reading (visual linguistic processing) is faster than listening (auditory linguistic processing) (Breznitz and Berman, 2003), with reading able to reach relatively high speeds (250–350 wpm for most skilled readers) not thought achievable for listening comprehension (Rayner et al, 2009). This difference in speed between reading and listening processing is reflected in ERP studies, with shorter latencies and durations typical of a visual N400 relative to an auditory N400 (Holcomb et al, 1992; Kutas and Federmeier, 2011; Luck, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain Vital Signs: Expanding From the Auditory to Visual Modality

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The critical need for rapid objective, physiological evaluation of brain function at point-of-care has led to the emergence of brain vital signs—a framework encompassing a portable electroencephalography (EEG) and an automated, quick test protocol. This framework enables access to well-established event-related potential (ERP) markers, which are specific to sensory, attention, and cognitive functions in both healthy and patient populations. However, all our applications to-date have used auditory stimulation, which have highlighted application challenges in persons with hearing impairments (e.g., aging, seniors, dementia). Consequently, it has become important to translate brain vital signs into a visual sensory modality. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to: 1) demonstrate the feasibility of visual brain vital signs; and 2) compare and normalize results from visual and auditory brain vital signs. Data were collected from 34 healthy adults (33 ± 13 years) using a 64-channel EEG system. Visual and auditory sequences were kept as comparable as possible to elicit the N100, P300, and N400 responses. Visual brain vital signs were elicited successfully for all three responses across the group (N100: F = 29.8380, p < 0.001; P300: F = 138.8442, p < 0.0001; N400: F = 6.8476, p = 0.01). Initial auditory-visual comparisons across the three components showed attention processing (P300) was found to be the most transferrable across modalities, with no group-level differences and correlated peak amplitudes (rho = 0.7, p = 0.0001) across individuals. Auditory P300 latencies were shorter than visual (p < 0.0001) but normalization and correlation (r = 0.5, p = 0.0033) implied a potential systematic difference across modalities. Reduced auditory N400 amplitudes compared to visual (p = 0.0061) paired with normalization and correlation across individuals (r = 0.6, p = 0.0012), also revealed potential systematic modality differences between reading and listening language comprehension. This study provides an initial understanding of the relationship between the visual and auditory sequences, while importantly establishing a visual sequence within the brain vital signs framework. With both auditory and visual stimulation capabilities available, it is possible to broaden applications across the lifespan.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain Vital Signs: Expanding From the Auditory to Visual Modality

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Word reading is based on perceptual, phonological, orthographic, and morphological processes, and reading fluency is determined by both the speed of processing within each system and synchronization and integration of the different systems (Breznitz, 2003(Breznitz, , 2006Breznitz & Berman, 2003;Seidenberg, 2005). Although the different systems function in somewhat different ways in Spanish, English, and Chinese, the synchronization and integration process may be a universal aspect of reading across the three languages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-language transfer of word reading accuracy and word reading fluency in Spanish-English and Chinese-English bilinguals: Script-universal and script-specific processes.

Pasquarella

Chen

Gottardo

et al. 2015

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined cross-language transfer of word reading accuracy and word reading fluency in Spanish-English and Chinese-English bilinguals. Participants included 51 Spanish-English and 64 Chinese-English bilinguals. Both groups of children completed parallel measures of phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, word reading accuracy, and word reading fluency in their first language (LI) and in English, their second language (L2) in Grade 1. Word reading accuracy and word reading fluency were assessed in LI and L2 again in Grade 2. Cross-language transfer of word reading accuracy was found only in the Spanish-English bilinguals. In contrast, cross-language transfer of word reading fluency was found in both the Spanish-English bilinguals and the Chinese-English bilinguals. Our results suggest transfer of word reading accuracy is based on the structural similarities between the LI and L2 scripts. By contrast, word reading fluency operates largely as a script-universal process. Implications for reading theory and for assessment and instruction of bilingual children are discussed.

show abstract

“…Several other interpretations have been offered and other factors invoked for understanding the relationship between naming speed and reading. Breznitz and colleagues (Breznitz, 2005;Breznitz & Berman, 2003;Breznitz & Meyler, 2003) proposed that individuals with slow naming speed have a broader difficulty in timing synchrony (see also Wimmer, 1993;Wimmer & Mayringer, 2001;Wolf & Bowers, 1999). Other researchers have argued that the relationship is due to executive processes, including working memory, supervisory attention, and inhibition (e.g., Amtmann, Abbott, & Berninger, 2007).…”

Section: Other Interpretations and Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Naming Speed and Reading: From Prediction to Instruction

Kirby

Georgiou

Martinussen

et al. 2010

Reading Research Quarterly

302

274

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current theoretical interpretations of naming speed and the research literature on its relation to reading are reviewed in this article. The authors examine naming speed's effects across languages and the shape of its relationship to reading. Also considered is the double‐deficit hypothesis, by which students with both slow naming speed and low phonological awareness are hypothesized to be most at‐risk for reading disability. Finally, the instructional literature regarding attempts to improve naming speed and use of naming speed as a predictor of response to intervention is reviewed. The authors conclude that naming speed is uniquely associated with a range of reading tasks across orthographies, and that early identification would be improved by the inclusion of naming speed measures. The poor response to instruction of students who have slow naming speed should be considered when designing interventions. Further work is required to specify the theoretical nature of naming speed and to determine how to help students with slow naming speed. لقد تمت مراجعة التفسيرات النظرية الجارية تجاه سرعة التحديد والأبحاث العلمية بشأن علاقتها بالقراءة في هذه المقالة. إذ يفحص المؤلفون تأثيرات سرعة التحديد عبر اللغات وشكل علاقتها بالقراءة. كما تم الأخذ في الاعتبار نظرية النقصان المتضاعف التي تقول لما يجمع البطء في سرعة التحديد والوعي الضعيف في الصوتيات عند الطالب فيفترض أنه في خطر من العجز في القراءة. وفي الختام تمت مراجعة الأبحاث التعليمية المتعلقة بالمساعي في تحسين سرعة التحديد واستخدام سرعة التحديد كمنبئ للإجابة للتدخل. وينتهي المؤلفون إلى أن سرعة التحديد متعلقة بشكل فريد بمدى من واجبات القراءة عبر الخطوط وأن التعريف المبكر سيتحسن من خلال انضمان مقاييس سرعة التحديد. ويُفترَض أن الاستجابة الضعيفة لتعليم الطلاب الذين يعانون من سرعة التحديد البطيئة أن يأخذهم بعين الاعتبار عند تصميم التدخلات. وهذا يتطلب أكثر جهد لتعريف طبيعة نظرية سرعة التحديد وتعيين كيفية مساعدة الطلاب الذين عندهم سرعة التحديد البطيئة. 本文评审现时有关命名速度的理论解释及命名速度与阅读之关系的文献。作者首先考查在不同的语言中命名速度的影响力及命名速度与阅读之关系的情形；继而探讨双缺失这个假设，也就是命名速度慢及语音意识低的学生最容易有阅读障碍的假设。最后作者评审教学文献，考查提高命名速度及使用命名速度作为干预教学效应预测因子的尝试。作者在结论中指出：在不同的语言表音方式中，命名速度与一系列的阅读学习任务均具有独特的关联；把命名速度评估纳入考核测试中会有助改善命名速度能力的早期鉴定；在设计干预教学时应考虑到命名速度慢的学生对教学反应差的问题；以及有需要进一步研究命名速度的理论性质，及确定帮助命名速度慢的学生的方法。 On analyse dans cet article les interprétations théoriques courantes de la vitesse de dénomination et la littérature de recherche concernant ses relations avec la lecture. Les auteurs analysent les effets de la vitesse de lecture à travers les langues et la forme de sa relation à la lecture. On analyse également l'hypothèse du double déficit selon laquelle les élèves ayant à la fois une vitesse de dénomination lente et une conscience phonologique faible sont considérés comme présentant le plus de risques de difficultés en lecture. On analyse enfin la littérature pédagogique sur les essais d'amélioration de la vitesse de lecture et d'utilisation de la vitesse de dénomination comme prédicteur de la réponse à l'intervention. Les auteurs concluent que la vitesse de dénomination est associée uniquement à un ensemble de tâches de lecture li...

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 40 publications

References 81 publications

Brain Vital Signs: Expanding From the Auditory to Visual Modality

Brain Vital Signs: Expanding From the Auditory to Visual Modality

Cross-language transfer of word reading accuracy and word reading fluency in Spanish-English and Chinese-English bilinguals: Script-universal and script-specific processes.

Naming Speed and Reading: From Prediction to Instruction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About