Lexical and nonlexical processing in developmental dyslexia: a case for different resources and different impairments

In a group of adult dyslexics word reading and, especially, word spelling are predicted more by what we have called lexical learning (tapped by a paired-associate task with pictures and written nonwords) than by phonological skills. Nonword reading and spelling, instead, are not associated with this task but they are predicted by phonological tasks. Consistently, surface and phonological dyslexics show opposite profiles on lexical learning and phonological tasks. The phonological dyslexics are more impaired on the phonological tasks, while the surface dyslexics are equally or more impaired on the lexical learning tasks. Finally, orthographic lexical learning explains more variation in spelling than in reading, and subtyping based on spelling returns more interpretable results than that based on reading. These results suggest that the quality of lexical representations is crucial to adult literacy skills. This is best measured by spelling and best predicted by a task of lexical learning. We hypothesize that lexical learning taps a uniquely human capacity to form new representations by recombining the units of a restricted set.

Lexical learning and dysgraphia in a group of adults with developmental dyslexia

We investigated the ability to learn new words in a group of 22 adults with developmental dyslexia/dysgraphia and the relationship between their learning and spelling problems. We identified a deficit that affected the ability to learn both spoken and written new words (lexical learning deficit). There were no comparable problems in learning other kinds of representations (lexical/semantic and visual) and the deficit could not be explained in terms of more traditional phonological deficits associated with dyslexia (phonological awareness, phonological STM). Written new word learning accounted for further variance in the severity of the dysgraphia after phonological abilities had been partialled out. We suggest that lexical learning may be an independent ability needed to create lexical/formal representations from a series of independent units. Theoretical and clinical implications are discussed. © 2005 Psychology Press Ltd.

Reduced attentional capacity, but normal processing speed and shifting of attention in developmental dyslexia: evidence from a serial task

We report the performance of a group of adult dyslexics and matched controls in an array-matching task where two strings of either consonants or symbols are presented side by side and have to be judged to be the same or different. The arrays may differ either in the order or identity of two adjacent characters. This task does not require naming – which has been argued to be the cause of dyslexics’ difficulty in processing visual arrays – but, instead, has a strong serial component as demonstrated by the fact that, in both groups, Reaction times (RTs) increase monotonically with position of a mismatch. The dyslexics are clearly impaired in all conditions and performance in the identity conditions predicts performance across orthographic tasks even after age, performance IQ and phonology are partialled out. Moreover, the shapes of serial position curves are revealing of the underlying impairment. In the dyslexics, RTs increase with position at the same rate as in the controls (lines are parallel) ruling out reduced processing speed or difficulties in shifting attention. Instead, error rates show a catastrophic increase for positions which are either searched later or more subject to interference. These results are consistent with a reduction in the attentional capacity needed in a serial task to bind together identity and positional information. This capacity is best seen as a reduction in the number of spotlights into which attention can be split to process information at different locations rather than as a more generic reduction of resources which would also affect processing the details of single objects.