English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Perceptual anchoring: Children with dyslexia benefit less than controls from contextual repetitions in speech processing

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons19831

Männel,  Claudia       
Department of Audiology and Phoniatrics, Charité University Medicine Berlin, Germany;
Department Neuropsychology, MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Max Planck Society;
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands;

/persons/resource/persons19903

Obrig,  Hellmuth       
Clinic for Cognitive Neurology, University of Leipzig, Germany;
Department Neurology, MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons86916

Schaadt,  Gesa       
Department Neuropsychology, MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Max Planck Society;
Department of Education and Psychology, FU Berlin, Germany;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

Maennel_2024.pdf
(Publisher version), 2MB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Männel, C., Ramos-Sanchez, J., Obrig, H., Ahissar, M., & Schaadt, G. (2024). Perceptual anchoring: Children with dyslexia benefit less than controls from contextual repetitions in speech processing. Clinical Neurophysiology, 166, 117-128. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2024.07.016.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000F-B852-5
Abstract
Objectives

Individuals with dyslexia perceive and utilize statistical features in the auditory input deficiently. The present study investigates whether affected children also benefit less from repeating context tones as perceptual anchors for subsequent speech processing.
Methods

In an event-related potential study, eleven-year-old children with dyslexia (n=21) and without dyslexia (n=20) heard syllable pairs, with the first syllable either receiving a constant pitch (anchor) or variable pitch (no-anchor), while second syllables were identical across conditions.
Results

Children with and without dyslexia showed smaller auditory P2 responses to constant-pitch versus variable-pitch first syllables, while only control children additionally showed smaller N1 and faster P1 responses. This suggests less automatic processing of anchor repetitions in dyslexia. For the second syllables, both groups showed faster P2 responses following anchor than no-anchor first syllables, but only controls additionally showed smaller P2 responses.
Conclusions

Children with and without dyslexia show differences in anchor effects. While both groups seem to allocate less attention to speech stimuli after contextual repetitions, children with dyslexia display less facilitation in speech processing from acoustic anchors.