Component Processes Subserving Rapid Automatized Naming in Dyslexic and Non‐dyslexic Readers

Abstract

The current study investigated which time components of rapid automatized naming (RAN) might predict group differences between dyslexic and nondyslexic readers (matched for age and reading level), and how these components relate to distinct reading measures. Subjects performed two RAN tasks (letters and objects) and data were analyzed through a response time analysis. Our results demonstrated that impaired RAN performance by dyslexic readers mainly stem from enhanced inter-item pause times and not from difficulties at the level of post-access motor production (expressed by articulation rates). Moreover, we also verified that overall RAN performance in dyslexics, and inter-item pause times, account for a significant proportion of variance in reading ability besides the effect of phonological processes. Therefore, it appears that underlying non-phonological factors may lie at the root of the association between rapid naming and reading ability. In normal readers, RAN performance becomes associated with reading ability only at early ages (i.e., in reading-matched controls), and in this case it appears to be the inter-item pause times of the RAN task that explain the association.

Predictors of Reading in Urdu: Does Deep Orthography Have an Impact?

“…Araújo et al, 2011) documenting that the predictive role of RAN in reading performance is stronger in impaired readers than in typical readers. Such results not only underscore the importance of rapid naming skills for readers with reading disability (Araújo et al, 2011) but also support research indicating that RAN and phonological measures predict different aspects of reading (e.g. Savage & Frederickson, 2005; Wolf & Bowers, 1999).…”

“…Araújo et al, 2011). It has been suggested that this poor performance among dyslexic readers is not due to less reading experience or limited letter names knowledge but to unsuccessful automatizing of rapid naming skills (e.g.…”

“…Assuming that RAN taps the ability to match visual/orthographic information to phonological codes, and in view of the inconsistent and deep nature of Urdu orthography, we expected alphanumeric RAN to predict not only fluency but also accuracy, whereas NWR was expected to predict reading accuracy (Felton & Brown, 1990; Nicholson & Fawcett, 1994; Savage & Frederickson, 2005). We expected further the predictive role of RAN in reading performance to be stronger in impaired readers than in controls (Araújo et al, 2011). Secondly, we expected there to be a considerable difference in performance on both NWR and RAN tasks between controls and the children in the reading disability group.…”

Visual naming deficits in dyslexia: An ERP investigation of different processing domains

“…Furthermore, the naming deficit persists into adulthood (e.g., Jones et al, 2009Jones et al, , 2016. Evidence show that dyslexic readers are maximally impaired in serial naming tasks -with matrix presentation of itemsthat require simultaneous activation/access of multiple visual and phonological representations that compete for output, as in the socalled rapid automatized naming tasks, RAN (Araújo et al, 2011b;Jones et al, 2010Jones et al, , 2008Wolf and Bowers, 1999;Wolf et al, 2002 However, individual stimulus presentation (i.e., discrete/confrontation naming tasks) also incurs a significant, albeit smaller, naming speed cost (e.g., Araújo et al, 2011a;Bowers and Swanson, 1991;Truman and Hennessey, 2006;see Jones et al (2009) for a direct contrast between discrete-and multiple-naming formats). Yet, it is still an open question which underlying processing stages are involved and contribute to impaired naming performance by dyslexic readers, which we investigate in the present study.…”

The contribution of discrete-trial naming and visual recognition to rapid automatized naming deficits of dyslexic children with and without a history of language delay

“…For example, when total time to complete RAN tasks is experimentally segregated into a pause time— namely the duration of pauses between items in sequenced articulations—and articulation time —namely the time to articulate each item—pause time and not articulation time significantly predicts reading ability, in both normal and DD readers (Georgiou et al, 2006; Araújo et al, 2011b). Hence, these results point to the inter-item processing—namely the processes intercurring from attentional disengaging from one stimulus to name retrieval for the next one—as the locus that drives RAN-reading association.…”