Integration of heard and seen speech: a factor in learning disabilities in children

Hayes, Erin; Tiippana, Kaisa; Nicol, Trent; Sams, Mikko; Kraus, Nina

doi:10.1016/s0304-3940(03)00971-6

Cited by 51 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This absence of differences between readers with dyslexia and typical readers is in line with the studies reporting intact audiovisual speech perception in dyslexia (Baart et al, 2012;Campbell et al, 1997;de Gelder and Vroomen, 1998;Groen & Jesse, 2013). This result is, however, at odds with studies showing fewer fusion responses in children (Hayes et al, 2003) and adults (Norrix et al, 2006) with learning disabilities. It is important to note that we tested adults diagnosed with developmental dyslexia whereas both Hayes et al (2003) and Norrix et al (2006) tested individuals with learning disabilities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…This result is, however, at odds with studies showing fewer fusion responses in children (Hayes et al, 2003) and adults (Norrix et al, 2006) with learning disabilities. It is important to note that we tested adults diagnosed with developmental dyslexia whereas both Hayes et al (2003) and Norrix et al (2006) tested individuals with learning disabilities. Although dyslexia is the most frequent learning disability, learning disabilities may reflect arithmetic, handwriting, and/or spelling problems (Shaywitz, Fletcher, & Shaywitz, 1995).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Hayes, Tiippana, Nicol, Sams, and Kraus (2003) showed that children with learning disabilities and typically developing children performed similarly on McGurk stimuli in low-and no-noise conditions. However, in a more difficult listening situation with a high level of noise, individuals with learning disabilities gave more visually based responses and fewer fusion responses than typically developing children.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A General Audiovisual Temporal Processing Deficit in Adult Readers With Dyslexia

Francisco

Jesse

Groen

et al. 2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Because reading is an audiovisual process, reading impairment may reflect an audiovisual processing deficit. The aim of the present study was to test the existence and scope of such a deficit in adult readers with dyslexia. Method We tested 39 typical readers and 51 adult readers with dyslexia on their sensitivity to the simultaneity of audiovisual speech and nonspeech stimuli, their time window of audiovisual integration for speech (using incongruent /aCa/ syllables), and their audiovisual perception of phonetic categories. Results Adult readers with dyslexia showed less sensitivity to audiovisual simultaneity than typical readers for both speech and nonspeech events. We found no differences between readers with dyslexia and typical readers in the temporal window of integration for audiovisual speech or in the audiovisual perception of phonetic categories. Conclusions The results suggest an audiovisual temporal deficit in dyslexia that is not specific to speech-related events. But the differences found for audiovisual temporal sensitivity did not translate into a deficit in audiovisual speech perception. Hence, there seems to be a hiatus between simultaneity judgment and perception, suggesting a multisensory system that uses different mechanisms across tasks. Alternatively, it is possible that the audiovisual deficit in dyslexia is only observable when explicit judgments about audiovisual simultaneity are required.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A General Audiovisual Temporal Processing Deficit in Adult Readers With Dyslexia

Francisco

Jesse

Groen

et al. 2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As mentioned before, reading impairment might reflect a deficit in audiovisual processing and, indeed, children and adult dyslexic readers have been shown to inadequately process audiovisual objects, for instance, while being presented with audiovisual and unisensory letters and speech sounds (Blau, van Atteveldt, Ekkebus, Goebel, & Blomert, 2009;Blau et al, 2010;Froyen, Willems, & Blomert, 2011;Kast, Bezzola, Jäncke, & Meyer, 2011;Kronschnabel, Brem, Maurer, & Brandeis, 2014;Mittag, Thesleff, Laasonen, & Kujala, 2013), while identifying unisensory and audiovisual speech (e.g., Hayes, Tiippana, Nicol, Sams, & Kraus, 2003), and while matching non-linguistic audiovisual materials (e.g., rectangles and tones, Widmann, Schröger, Tervaniemi, Pakarinen, & Kujala, 2012). For a subset of the sample of participants tested in this study, we have recently shown differences between dyslexic and typical adult readers in their audiovisual temporal sensitivity (Francisco, Jesse, Groen, & McQueen, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the usual cognitive suspects: The importance of speechreading and audiovisual temporal sensitivity in reading ability

Francisco

Groen

Jesse³

et al. 2017

Learning and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to clarify whether audiovisual processing accounted for variance in reading and reading-related abilities, beyond the effect of a set of measures typically associated with individual differences in both reading and audiovisual processing. Testing adults with and without a diagnosis of dyslexia, we showed that-across all participants, and after accounting for variance in cognitive abilities-audiovisual temporal sensitivity contributed uniquely to variance in reading errors. This is consistent with previous studies demonstrating an audiovisual deficit in dyslexia. Additionally, we showed that speechreading (identification of speech based on visual cues from the talking face alone) was a unique contributor to variance in phonological awareness in dyslexic readers only: those who scored higher on speechreading, scored lower on phonological awareness. This suggests a greater reliance on visual speech as a compensatory mechanism when processing auditory speech is problematic. A secondary aim of this study was to better understand the nature of dyslexia. The finding that a sub-group of dyslexic readers scored low on phonological awareness and high on speechreading is consistent with a hybrid perspective of dyslexia: There are multiple possible pathways to reading impairment, which may translate into multiple profiles of dyslexia.

show abstract

“…Even if that view were generally accepted, there are compelling reasons to press forward with the investigation of low level multisensory operations. In particular, given the evidence of multisensory deficits in older and impaired populations (Hayes et al, 2003;Ross et al, 2007;Oberman and Ramachandran, 2008;Musacchia et al, 2009) an understanding of how multisensory integration operates in the normal system allows us to consider how the impaired system might benefit from rehabilitation with multimodal stimulation. Although we will not deal directly with this question, it remains an important motivation for future research in this field.…”

Section: Introduction: No Place (For Unisensory Auditory Neurons) To mentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuronal mechanisms, response dynamics and perceptual functions of multisensory interactions in auditory cortex

Musacchia

Schroeder

2009

Hearing Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most auditory events in nature are accompanied by non-auditory signals, such as a view of the speaker's face during face-to-face communication or the vibration of a string during a musical performance. While it is known that accompanying visual and somatosensory signals can benefit auditory perception, often by making the sound seem louder, the specific neural bases for sensory amplification are still debated. In this review, we want to deal with what we regard as confusion on two topics that are crucial to our understanding of multisensory integration mechanisms in auditory cortex: (1) Anatomical Underpinnings (e.g., what circuits underlie multisensory convergence), and (2) Temporal Dynamics (e.g., what time windows of integration are physiologically feasible). The combined evidence on multisensory structure and function in auditory cortex advances the emerging view of the relationship between perception and low level multisensory integration. In fact, it seems that the question is no longer whether low level, putatively unisensory cortex is accessible to multisensory influences, but how.

show abstract

Integration of heard and seen speech: a factor in learning disabilities in children

Cited by 51 publications

References 18 publications

A General Audiovisual Temporal Processing Deficit in Adult Readers With Dyslexia

A General Audiovisual Temporal Processing Deficit in Adult Readers With Dyslexia

Beyond the usual cognitive suspects: The importance of speechreading and audiovisual temporal sensitivity in reading ability

Neuronal mechanisms, response dynamics and perceptual functions of multisensory interactions in auditory cortex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About