Object Naming in Dyslexic Children: More Than a Phonological Deficit

Abstract

ABSTRACT. In the present study, the authors investigate how some visual factors related to early stages of visual-object naming modulate naming performance in dyslexia. The performance of dyslexic children was compared with 2 control groups-normal readers matched for age and normal readers matched for reading level-while performing a discrete naming task in which color and dimensionality of the visually presented objects were manipulated. The results showed that 2-dimensional naming performance improved for color representations in control readers but not in dyslexics. In contrast to control readers, dyslexics were also insensitive to the stimulus's dimensionality. These findings are unlikely to be explained by a phonological processing problem related to phonological access or retrieval but suggest that dyslexics have a lower capacity for coding and decoding visual surface features of 2-dimensional representations or problems with the integration of visual information stored in long-term memory. This work was

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

“…Some indirect evidence seems consistent with the hypothesis of a contribution of low-level visual factors to RAN performance and its association with reading (Stainthorp et al, 2010; Araújo et al, 2011a). Using a visual naming task Araújo et al (2011a) manipulated some variables related to early stages of visual processing of objects and found that, in contrast to control readers, naming performance of DD subjects did not improve with color or 3-dimensional object presentation compared with black-and-white or 2-dimensional object presentation respectively. These results lead the authors to state that “ processes involved in early visual feature analysis or in the integration of visual information stored in long-term memory might be affected in dyslexia ” (p. 224).…”

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

“…Based on previous behavioral (e.g., Jones et al, 2010) and ERP studies (Eddy and Holcomb, 2010;Eddy et al, 2006), we expected shorter response latencies and also attenuated (less negative) amplitudes of the N/P190 and N300 visual components for those target pictures that were preceded by a picture prime relating on the perceptual dimension (compared to unrelated primetarget pairs), while perceptual priming effects on the N400 ERP component are not strongly predicted. We note here that previous behavioral reports had already alluded to the contribution of early stages of processing on the naming performance in dyslexia (i.e., prior to higher level of linguistic processing; e.g., Araújo et al, 2011a;Jones et al, 2008Jones et al, , 2010, and one of the exciting aspects of using ERPs is that we can tackle the specific processes alluded to in this assumption (early versus late visual processing stages).…”

“…This is a quite interesting result as it suggests for the first time that individuals with dyslexia may fail to activate an intermediate representation that relies on a "more complex" integration of perceptual features onto form-specific representations in memory, reflected in the N300 neural marker. Some previous behavioral studies had already explored for the possible involvement of early stages prior to higher level linguistic processing in dyslexia, by using a manipulated version of a naming task (e.g., Araújo et al, 2011a;Jones et al, 2008Jones et al, , 2010. For example, Araújo and colleagues manipulated various surface attributes that should affect stimulus discriminability and visual feature analysis (such as the amount of detail/complexity and color), fundamental to successful recognition.…”

“…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.…”

“…Moreover, in at least a subgroup of dyslexics, phonological processing (assessed by phonological awareness and verbal short-term memory tasks) is close to the normal range, while rapid naming performance is significantly affected (Araújo et al, 2010;King et al, 2007;Nelson, 2015;O'Brien et al, 2012;Papadopoulos et al, 2009;Wolf et al, 2002). Therefore, the interest in exploring the role of other (extraphonological) cognitive processing stages has seen a revival, in particular those related to early stages of visual information processing (e.g., Araújo et al, 2011a;Jones et al, 2010Jones et al, , 2008. Although there is a substantial literature documenting dissociations between dyslexic and non-dyslexic readers' naming performance, until now only a few studies have been conducted that directly compare the performance on experimentally manipulated versions of the naming tasks and have tried to disentangle the contribution of visual, semantic and phonological aspects during visual naming.…”