Skip to content
Get in touch

Research › Learning & Development

Resting EEG effective connectivity at the sources in developmental dysphonetic dyslexia. Differences with non-specific reading delay

STS Instructor Authored by Giuseppe A. Chiarenza

Share

Suggested message

Check out this Knowledge Base article from StressTherapy Solutions: Resting EEG effective connectivity at the sources in developmental dysphonetic dyslexia. Differences with non-specific reading delay.

Facebook LinkedIn Email

Facebook doesn't let websites fill in your post. Use Copy message, then paste it in.

Study at a glance

Area
Learning & Development
Study type
Observational study
Authors
Bosch-Bayard J, Girini K, Biscay RJ, Valdes-Sosa P, Evans AC, Chiarenza GA
Journal
International Journal of Psychophysiology
Year
2020
Participants
227 (184 dysphonetic dyslexia, 43 non-specific reading delay)
Population
Children
Protocol
resting QEEG source analysis with directed (isolated effective) coherence among 17 regions

Key findings

  • The left calcarine (primary visual) region acted as a stronger information hub in dysphonetic dyslexia
  • The left rolandic operculum was the more active hub in the reading-delay group
  • In dyslexia, outflow from the visual hub reached right postcentral, left paracentral, right angular and right supplementary motor areas
  • Much of this flow occurred in slow bands, interpreted as support for a timing-deficit model of dyslexia

Children with dysphonetic dyslexia (difficulty linking letters to sounds) were compared with children whose reading was simply delayed, to test the idea that dyslexia involves poorly timed communication between brain areas. Resting EEG was mapped to its cortical sources, and the direction of information flow among 17 regions was estimated and compared statistically between groups. The two groups relied on different hub regions, and in the dyslexia group a left visual-cortex hub sent information to several sensory, motor and parietal areas across most frequency bands, including slow delta and theta, which the authors read as a sign of less efficient signalling.