Domain-general but not speech-specific auditory duration perception predicts pseudoword reading in adults

Abstract

Associations between reading performance and duration perception have been found both for domain-general and speech-specific duration perception. However, research seems limited to children and, critically, the predictive value of the two duration perception modalities has not been compared so far. In the present study we compared the weight of domain-general (comparison of time intervals defined by beeps) vs. speech-specific duration perception (pre-attentive EEG responses to consonants with different durations) as statistical predictors of reading in a sample of 46 neurotypical adults (18–43 years old) with 13 years of schooling on average. Reading included word and pseudoword decoding, as well as reading comprehension. We ran one regression model with domain-general and speech-specific duration perception as predictors for each of the three reading skills. Pseudoword decoding was the only reading skill that was significantly predicted by duration perception, and this happened for domain-general duration perception only. A complementary analysis adding 26 typically developing and 24 dyslexic adults to the main sample (n = 96 in total) showed the same pattern of results in dyslexics, but not in added controls. Our findings strengthen the idea that duration perception is important to phonological encoding and its use in grapheme-to-phoneme conversion, given that only pseudoword decoding was predicted by the interval comparison task. The irrelevance of speech-specific duration perception tones down the possibility that accurately perceiving the length of speech sounds is crucial to skilled reading.

Duration Perception and Reading in Typically Developing Adults and Adults with Developmental Dyslexia: Implications for Assessment and Intervention

“…In the current investigation, we aimed to gain a better understanding of the positive association we found in a previous study between duration perception for intervals ranging between 134 and 733 ms and a measure of pseudoword reading that combined speed and accuracy [ 23 ] in both adults with and without dyslexia. Specifically, we wanted to determine (1) whether this association would replicate in new groups of adults and, if so, (2) how it could depend on the reading parameter being measured (speed vs. accuracy).…”

“…Nevertheless, challenges in discriminating durations within the range of 400–1200 ms, which are longer than those involved in phonemic contrasts, have also been discovered [ 22 ]. In a previous study of ours [ 23 ], we showed that duration perception for intervals between 134 and 733 ms delimited by beeps was related to pseudoword reading (the number of pseudowords read correctly per time interval) in TD Portuguese adults. This finding would be consistent with duration perception for intervals in the delta range (stress accents in speech) relating to the efficient encoding of speech units in general, thus paralleling beat perception in this regard.…”

“…Knowing whether this specific timing-reading association is equally present in developmental dyslexia vs. typical development is crucial in this context, given that it informs on the need to consider either similar or different strategies for intervention vs. mere stimulation. In addition to a neurotypical adult sample, Batista et al [ 23 ] examined a complementary sample of adults with dyslexia and found the significant correlation between duration and pseudoword reading to also be present in these individuals. However, Batista et al [ 23 ] used a composite reading measure, referring to both speed and accuracy in reading.…”

“…In addition to a neurotypical adult sample, Batista et al [ 23 ] examined a complementary sample of adults with dyslexia and found the significant correlation between duration and pseudoword reading to also be present in these individuals. However, Batista et al [ 23 ] used a composite reading measure, referring to both speed and accuracy in reading. Deviations in speed vs. accuracy may have different clinical meanings.…”

“…In the present paper, we examined the relation between duration perception and two types of reading measures—speed and accuracy—in a sample of adult readers with vs. without dyslexia. We used the duration perception task from Batista et al [ 23 ] and extracted reading measures for both words and pseudowords. We expected to see significant associations involving pseudowords, but not words, in both groups.…”