SUMMARY Developmental dyslexia is a reading disorder, yet deficits also manifest in the magnocellular-dominated dorsal visual system. Uncertainty about whether visual deficits are causal or consequential to reading disability encumbers accurate identification and appropriate treatment of this common learning disability. Using fMRI, we demonstrate in typical readers a relationship between reading ability and activity in area V5/MT during visual motion processing and, as expected, also found lower V5/MT activity for dyslexic children compared to age-matched controls. However, when dyslexics were matched to younger controls on reading ability, no differences emerged, suggesting that weakness in V5/MT may not be causal to dyslexia. To further test for causality, dyslexics underwent a phonological-based reading intervention. Surprisingly, V5/MT activity increased along with intervention-driven reading gains, demonstrating that activity here is mobilized through reading. Our results provide strong evidence that visual magnocellular dysfunction is not causal to dyslexia, but may instead be consequential to impoverished reading.
We have long known that language is lateralized to the left hemisphere (LH) in most neurologically healthy adults. In contrast, findings on lateralization of function during development are more complex. As in adults, anatomical, electrophysiological, and neuroimaging studies in infants and children indicate LH lateralization for language. However, in very young children, lesions to either hemisphere are equally likely to result in language deficits, suggesting that language is distributed symmetrically early in life. We address this apparent contradiction by examining patterns of functional MRI (fMRI) language activation in children (ages 4 through 13) and adults (ages 18 through 29). In contrast to previous studies, we focus not on lateralization per se but rather on patterns of left-hemisphere (LH) and right-hemisphere (RH) activation across individual participants over age. Our analyses show significant activation not only in the LH language network but also in their RH homologs in all of the youngest children (ages 4 through 6). The proportion of participants showing significant RH activation decreases over age, with over 60% of adults lacking any significant RH activation. A whole-brain correlation analysis revealed an age-related decrease in language activation only in the RH homolog of Broca’s area. This correlation was independent of task difficulty. We conclude that, while language is left-lateralized throughout life, the RH contribution to language processing is also strong early in life and decreases through childhood. Importantly, this early RH language activation may represent a developmental mechanism for recovery following early LH injury.
The "bilingual advantage" theory stipulates that constant selection and suppression between 2 languages results in enhanced executive control (EC). Behavioral studies of EC in bilinguals have employed wide-ranging tasks and report some conflicting results. To avoid concerns about tasks, we employed a different approach, measuring gray matter volume (GMV) in adult bilinguals, reasoning that any EC-associated benefits should manifest as relatively greater frontal GMV. Indeed, Spanish-English-speaking bilinguals exhibited greater bilateral frontal GMV compared with English-speaking monolinguals. Was this observation attributable to the constant selection and inhibition of 2 spoken languages? To answer this question, we drew on bimodal bilinguals of American Sign Language (ASL) and English who, unlike unimodal bilinguals, can simultaneously use both languages and have been shown not to possess the EC advantage. In this group, there was no greater GMV when compared with monolinguals. Together these results provide neuroanatomical evidence in support of the bilingual advantage theory.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.