Dyslexics' faster decay of implicit memory for sounds and words is manifested in their shorter neural adaptation.

Sagi Jaffe-Dax, Or Frenkel, Merav Ahissar
Author Information
  1. Sagi Jaffe-Dax: Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Brain Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel. ORCID
  2. Or Frenkel: Psychology Department, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
  3. Merav Ahissar: Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Brain Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.

Abstract

Dyslexia is a prevalent reading disability whose underlying mechanisms are still disputed. We studied the neural mechanisms underlying dyslexia using a simple frequency-discrimination task. Though participants were asked to compare the two tones in each trial, implicit memory of previous trials affected their responses. We hypothesized that implicit memory decays faster among dyslexics. We tested this by increasing the temporal intervals between consecutive trials, and by measuring the behavioral impact and ERP responses from the auditory cortex. Dyslexics showed a faster decay of implicit memory effects on both measures, with similar time constants. Finally, faster decay of implicit memory also characterized the impact of sound regularities in benefitting dyslexics' oral reading rate. Their benefit decreased faster as a function of the time interval from the previous reading of the same non-word. We propose that dyslexics' shorter neural adaptation paradoxically accounts for their longer reading times, since it reduces their temporal window of integration of past stimuli, resulting in noisier and less reliable predictions for both simple and complex stimuli. Less reliable predictions limit their acquisition of reading expertise.

Keywords

References

  1. Proc Biol Sci. 1996 Aug 22;263(1373):961-5 [PMID: 8805833]
  2. Int J Neurosci. 2010 Jan;120(1):51-9 [PMID: 20128672]
  3. Neuropsychologia. 2007 Apr 9;45(8):1608-20 [PMID: 17303197]
  4. Brain Lang. 2005 Sep;94(3):260-73 [PMID: 16098376]
  5. Curr Biol. 2010 Feb 23;20(4):R136-40 [PMID: 20178752]
  6. Dyslexia. 2010 Aug;16(3):194-212 [PMID: 20680991]
  7. J Cogn Neurosci. 2010 May;22(5):875-87 [PMID: 19413475]
  8. J Neurosci. 2015 Sep 2;35(35):12116-26 [PMID: 26338323]
  9. J Neurophysiol. 2013 Aug;110(4):973-83 [PMID: 23719212]
  10. Neuropsychologia. 1970 Jul;8(3):323-50 [PMID: 5522566]
  11. J Neurosci. 2013 Feb 20;33(8):3500-4 [PMID: 23426677]
  12. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014 Jun;18(6):274-5 [PMID: 24568928]
  13. Science. 1992 Dec 4;258(5088):1668-70 [PMID: 1455246]
  14. J Cogn Neurosci. 2008 Jul;20(7):1146-60 [PMID: 18284344]
  15. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2004 Mar;30(2):416-30 [PMID: 14979815]
  16. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Aug 6;99(16):10911-6 [PMID: 12142463]
  17. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011 Jan;15(1):3-10 [PMID: 21093350]
  18. J Learn Disabil. 2013 Sep-Oct;46(5):413-27 [PMID: 22323280]
  19. Nat Neurosci. 2005 Jul;8(7):862-3 [PMID: 15924138]
  20. PLoS Comput Biol. 2012;8(10):e1002731 [PMID: 23133343]
  21. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005 Oct;25(2):547-53 [PMID: 16198089]
  22. Child Dev. 1977 Mar;48(1):55-60 [PMID: 844361]
  23. Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Nov;11(11):458-65 [PMID: 17983834]
  24. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Dec 5;97(25):13907-12 [PMID: 11095716]
  25. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol. 2012;23(3):109-15 [PMID: 23091274]
  26. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2012;29(1-2):104-22 [PMID: 22559749]
  27. Neuroimage. 2010 Jan 1;49(1):849-64 [PMID: 19591945]
  28. Science. 2013 Dec 6;342(6163):1251-4 [PMID: 24311693]
  29. Cognition. 1997 Jun;63(3):315-34 [PMID: 9265873]
  30. Nat Neurosci. 2003 Apr;6(4):391-8 [PMID: 12652303]
  31. Percept Psychophys. 1988 Sep;44(3):233-42 [PMID: 3174355]
  32. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2015 Dec;35:142-7 [PMID: 26318534]
  33. Neuropsychologia. 2011 Oct;49(12):3338-45 [PMID: 21864552]
  34. Cereb Cortex. 2007 May;17(5):1173-8 [PMID: 16831855]
  35. J Neurosci Methods. 2004 Mar 15;134(1):9-21 [PMID: 15102499]
  36. PLoS One. 2010 Apr 22;5(4):e10283 [PMID: 20421969]
  37. J Neurophysiol. 2015 Apr 1;113(7):2582-91 [PMID: 25652920]
  38. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Aug 21;109(34):13841-6 [PMID: 22869724]
  39. Brain Lang. 1980 Mar;9(2):182-98 [PMID: 7363063]
  40. Dev Sci. 2004 Sep;7(4):F11-8 [PMID: 15484585]
  41. Nat Neurosci. 2006 Dec;9(12):1558-64 [PMID: 17115044]
  42. Curr Biol. 1998 Jul 2;8(14):791-7 [PMID: 9663387]
  43. J Cogn Neurosci. 2015 Jul;27(7):1308-21 [PMID: 25603023]
  44. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Jun;23 (3):678-91 [PMID: 26438255]
  45. Cortex. 2010 Nov-Dec;46(10):1211-5 [PMID: 20933228]
  46. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 Jan 18;:1-9 [PMID: 28114605]
  47. Neuroimage. 2007 Feb 15;34(4):1443-9 [PMID: 17188898]
  48. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Feb 1;102(5):1797-802 [PMID: 15665101]
  49. J Cogn Neurosci. 1993 Summer;5(3):363-70 [PMID: 23972223]
  50. Am J Psychol. 1948 Jul;61(3):309-22 [PMID: 18874574]
  51. Hear Res. 2006 Sep;219(1-2):36-47 [PMID: 16839723]
  52. Cognition. 1990 May;35(2):159-82 [PMID: 2354611]
  53. Vision Res. 2004 May;44(10):1047-63 [PMID: 15031099]
  54. Nat Neurosci. 2014 May;17(5):738-43 [PMID: 24686785]
  55. Nat Neurosci. 2015 Oct;18(10):1509-17 [PMID: 26343249]
  56. Neuropsychologia. 2012 Jul;50(8):1895-905 [PMID: 22561890]
  57. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2013 Feb;23(1):37-42 [PMID: 23040541]
  58. Brain. 2014 Dec;137(Pt 12):3136-41 [PMID: 25125610]
  59. J Exp Child Psychol. 1996 Nov;63(2):386-415 [PMID: 8923752]
  60. J Neurosci. 2004 Nov 17;24(46):10440-53 [PMID: 15548659]
  61. J Vis. 2016 Jul 1;16(9):10 [PMID: 27472497]
  62. Nature. 1964 Jul 25;203:380-4 [PMID: 14197376]
  63. PLoS Comput Biol. 2014 Dec 04;10(12):e1003948 [PMID: 25474117]
  64. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1982 Nov;54(5):561-9 [PMID: 6181979]

Grants

  1. /CIHR

MeSH Term

Adult
Auditory Perception
Dyslexia
Female
Humans
Male
Memory
Pattern Recognition, Visual
Reading
Sound
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0implicitmemoryreadingfasterneuraldecayadaptationunderlyingmechanismsdyslexiasimpleprevioustrialsresponsestemporalimpactauditorytimedyslexics'shorterstimulireliablepredictionsDyslexiaprevalentdisabilitywhosestilldisputedstudiedusingfrequency-discriminationtaskThoughparticipantsaskedcomparetwotonestrialaffectedhypothesizeddecaysamongdyslexicstestedincreasingintervalsconsecutivemeasuringbehavioralERPcortexDyslexicsshowedeffectsmeasuressimilarconstantsFinallyalsocharacterizedsoundregularitiesbenefittingoralratebenefitdecreasedfunctionintervalnon-wordproposeparadoxicallyaccountslongertimessincereduceswindowintegrationpastresultingnoisierlesscomplexLesslimitacquisitionexpertiseDyslexics'soundswordsmanifestedperceptioneventrelatedpotentialhumanneuroscience

Similar Articles

Cited By