Improvement of the Error‐detection Mechanism in Adults with Dyslexia Following Reading Acceleration Training

Abstract

The error-detection mechanism aids in preventing error repetition during a given task. Electroencephalography demonstrates that error detection involves two event-related potential components: error-related and correct-response negativities (ERN and CRN, respectively). Dyslexia is characterized by slow, inaccurate reading. In particular, individuals with dyslexia have a less active error-detection mechanism during reading than typical readers. In the current study, we examined whether a reading training programme could improve the ability to recognize words automatically (lexical representations) in adults with dyslexia, thereby resulting in more efficient error detection during reading. Behavioural and electrophysiological measures were obtained using a lexical decision task before and after participants trained with the reading acceleration programme. ERN amplitudes were smaller in individuals with dyslexia than in typical readers before training but increased following training, as did behavioural reading scores. Differences between the pre-training and post-training ERN and CRN components were larger in individuals with dyslexia than in typical readers. Also, the error-detection mechanism as represented by the ERN/CRN complex might serve as a biomarker for dyslexia and be used to evaluate the effectiveness of reading intervention programmes. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Probability learning and feedback processing in dyslexia: A performance and heart rate analysis

“…An important goal of the current study was to assess performance monitoring. This aim was prompted by findings reported by Horowitz‐Kraus and colleagues (Horowitz‐Kraus, ; Horowitz‐Kraus & Breznitz, , ) who observed atypical error and feedback processing in individuals with dyslexia. One window to corrective feedback processing in the current task is provided by the stay‐shift analysis of responses on inconsistent mapping trials.…”

“…Similar findings were reported in a study differentiating individuals with attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) versus individuals with a comorbid diagnosis (ADHD and dyslexia; Horowitz‐Kraus, ). Subsequently, this group examined the effects of a reading‐intervention program and showed improved reading accuracy and accelerated reading speed after intervention, as well as increased amplitude of the error‐related negativity, and the more so in dyslexics relative to typical readers (Horowitz‐Kraus, ; Horowitz‐Kraus & Breznitz, ). Moreover, the intervention strengthened the connectivity between the left fusiform area, involved in the processing of word print, and the right anterior cingulate cortex, the putative source of the error‐related negativity.…”

Psychosocial intervention in at-risk adolescents: using event-related potentials to assess changes in decision making and feedback processing

“…A number of existing studies have used the FRN (or variations of it) to assess numerous intervention styles, including mindfulness [68,69], and cognitive behavioural therapy [70]. The FRN has been used to track intervention-related change in populations including adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder [69], children and young adults with generalized or social anxiety disorders [70], adolescents with dyslexia [71] and healthy adults [68]. Our study therefore extends the utility of the FRN to at-risk adolescent populations, and to community-based psychosocial interventions.…”

Contributions of Letter-Speech Sound Learning and Visual Print Tuning to Reading Improvement: Evidence from Brain Potential and Dyslexia Training Studies

“…There are a few neurophysiological studies reporting deficits in dyslexics in the error detection mechanism, as reflected by the ERN during a lexical decision task [ 142 , 143 , 144 , 145 , 146 ]. One of those studies also reported changes in the ERN responses in adult dyslexics after a reading training [ 142 ]. Another study found reduced ERN amplitudes in non-compensated dyslexics compared to compensated dyslexics (i.e., slow readers with relatively well-preserved decoding abilities) [ 146 ].…”