Phonological Theory of Dyslexia
Running head: Phonological Theory of Dyslexia
Phonological Theory of Dyslexia
Name
Course
Tutor
Date
Introduction Learning difficulties have been a common occurrence and there are many theories established to explain this disorder. Dyslexia, the common term for learning problems, affects a large part of the population and several studies have been carried out to determine the main cause of the disorder. Psychologists have been engaged in debate as to what theory best describes the occurrence of dyslexia with support for either of the three dominant theories of developmental dyslexia namely; the phonological deficit theory, cerebellar theory or the magnocellular theory. The phonological deficit theory has received greater support among most practitioners and this study will look into the support provided for this theory as well as reasons for its opposition. Specifically, the study will dwell on the neurobiological aspect of the theory and gaps that have not been answered by previous studies.
Phonological (deficit) Theory This theory is based on the idea that learning is based on word pronunciation. This means that a person who suffers from the inability to pronounce sounds correctly will have a reading problem as such a person cannot be able to associate a word with sounds (Ramus, et al., 2003). The general assumption in this theory is that phonetics is the basic unit of learning and when it is impaired, then a student or learner is subject to learning difficulties. Various scholars have supported this theory as an explanation to the occurrence of dyslexia in including Ramus, et al (2003) who, in their study, suggested that phonological disorders were most common in people with learning difficulties. The authors show that learning is affected by the ability to comprehend the sounds associated with words (Ramus, et al., 2003; Castles & Coltheart, 2004). In addition, the authors conducted a study that examined dyslexic students on
Phonological Theory of Dyslexia
Name
Course
Tutor
Date
Introduction Learning difficulties have been a common occurrence and there are many theories established to explain this disorder. Dyslexia, the common term for learning problems, affects a large part of the population and several studies have been carried out to determine the main cause of the disorder. Psychologists have been engaged in debate as to what theory best describes the occurrence of dyslexia with support for either of the three dominant theories of developmental dyslexia namely; the phonological deficit theory, cerebellar theory or the magnocellular theory. The phonological deficit theory has received greater support among most practitioners and this study will look into the support provided for this theory as well as reasons for its opposition. Specifically, the study will dwell on the neurobiological aspect of the theory and gaps that have not been answered by previous studies.
Phonological (deficit) Theory This theory is based on the idea that learning is based on word pronunciation. This means that a person who suffers from the inability to pronounce sounds correctly will have a reading problem as such a person cannot be able to associate a word with sounds (Ramus, et al., 2003). The general assumption in this theory is that phonetics is the basic unit of learning and when it is impaired, then a student or learner is subject to learning difficulties. Various scholars have supported this theory as an explanation to the occurrence of dyslexia in including Ramus, et al (2003) who, in their study, suggested that phonological disorders were most common in people with learning difficulties. The authors show that learning is affected by the ability to comprehend the sounds associated with words (Ramus, et al., 2003; Castles & Coltheart, 2004). In addition, the authors conducted a study that examined dyslexic students on
References: Boets, B., Vandermosten, M., Poelmans, H., Luts, H., Wouters, J., & Ghesquiere, P. (2011). Preschool impairments in auditory processing and speech perception uniquely predict future reading problems. Research in Developmental Disabilities , 32, 560-570. Bonte, M. L., & Blomert, L. (2004). Developmental dyslexia: ERP correlates of anomalous phonological processing during spoken word recognition. Cognitive Brain Research , 21, 360-376. Carreiras, M., Seghier, M. L., Baquero, S., Estevez, A., Lozano, A., Devlin, J. T., et al. (2009). An anatomical signature for literacy. Nature , 461, 983-88. Castles, A., & Coltheart, M. (2004). Is there a causal link from phonological awareness to success in learning to read? Cognition , 91, 77-111. Goswami, U. (2003). Why theories about developmental dyslexia require developmental designs. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 7 (12), 534-540. Ivry, R. B., & Justus, T. C. (2001). A neural instantiation of the motor theory of speech perception. Trends in Neurosciences , 24 (9), 513-515. Jednorog, K., Marchewka, A., Tacikowski, P., Heim, S., & Grabowska, A. (2011). Electrophysiological evidence for the magnocellular-dorsal pathway deficit in dyslexia. Developmental Science , 14 (4), 873-880. Joly-Pottuz, B., Mercier, M., Leynaud, A., & Habib, M. (2008). Combined auditory and articulatory training improves phonological deficit in children with dyslexia. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation: An International Journal , 18 (4), 402-429. Kevan, A., & Pammer, K. (2008). Visual deficits in pre-readers at familial risk for dyslexia. Vision Research , 48, 2835-39. Kovelman, I., Norton, E. S., Christodoulou, J. A., Gaab, N., Lieberman, D. A., Triantafyllou, C., et al. (2011). Brain Basis of Phonological Awareness for Spoken Language in Children and Its Disruption in Dyslexia. Cerebral Cortex , 10.1093/cercor/bhr094. Laycock, R., Crewther, D. P., Fitzgerald, P. B., & Crewther, S. G. (2009). TMS disruption of V5/MT+ indicates a role for the dorsal stream. Experimental Brain Research , 197, 69-79. Leppänen, P. H., Hämäläinen, J., Guttorm, T., Eklund, K., Salminen, H., Tanskanen, A., et al. (2011). Infant brain responses associated with reading-related skills before school and at school age. Clinical Neurophysiology , 42, 35-41. Nicolson, R. I., & Fawcett, A. J. (2011). Dyslexia, dysgraphia, procedural learning and the cerebellum. Cortex , 47, 117-127. Nicolson, R. I., Fawcett, A. J., & Dean, P. (2001). A TINS debate – Hindbrain versus the forebrain: a case for cerebellar deficit in developmental dyslexia. Trends in Neurosciences , 24 (9), 508-511. Pernet, C., Andersson, J., Paulesu, E., & Demonet, J. F. (2009). When All Hypotheses are Right: A Multifocal Account of Dyslexia. Human Brain Mapping , 30, 2278-92. Ramus, F., Rosen, S., Dakin, S. C., Day, B. L., Castellote, J. M., White, S., et al. (2003). Theories of developmental dyslexia: insights from a multiple case study of dyslexic adults. Brain , 126, 841-865. Raschlea, N. M., Zuk, J., & Gaab, N. (2012). Functional characteristics of developmental dyslexia in left-hemispheric posterior brain regions predate reading onset. PNAS , 109 (6), 2156-2161. Scerri, T. S., & Schulte-Ko¨rne, G. (2010). Genetics of developmental dyslexia. European Child Adolscence Psychiatry , 19, 179-197. Snowling, M. J. (2008). Specific Disorders and Broader Phenotypes: The case of Dyslexia. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 61 (1), 142-156. Stein, J. (2001). The Magnocellular Theory of Developmental Dyslexia. Dyslexia , 7, 12-36. Stein, J., & Walsh, V. (1997). To see but not to read; the magnocellular theory of dyslexia. Trends In Neuroscience , 20 (4), 147-152. Turkeltaub, P. E., Gareau, L., Flowers, D. L., Zeffiro, T. A., & Eden, G. F. (2003). Development of neural mechanisms for reading. Nature Neuroscience , 6 (6), 767-773. Viholainen, H., Aro, M., Ahonen, T., Crawford, S., Cantell, M., & Kooistra, L. (2011). Are balance problems connected to reading speed or the familial risk of dyslexia? Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology , 350-353. Vukovic, R. K., & Siegel, L. S. (2006). The Double-Deficit Hypothesis : A Comprehensive Analysis of the Evidence. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 39 (1), 25-47. Wandell, B. A. (2011). The neurobiological basis of seeing words. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences , 1224, 63-80. Wolf, M., Bowers, P. G., & Biddle, K. (2000). Naming-Speed Processes, Timing, and Reading : A Conceptual Review. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 33 (4), 387-407. Zeffiro, T., & Eden, G. (2001). The cerebellum and dyslexia: perpetrator or innocent or innocent. Trends in Neurosciences , 24 (9), 512-513.