A new study says it has ended the long-lasting debate on the causes of dyslexia and also opened the way to a new approach for early identification and interventions for the 10 percent of children for whom reading is extremely difficult.
For children with dyslexia, the trouble begins even before they start reading and for reasons that don't necessarily reflect other language skills. Researchers say their new report reveals a causal connection between early problems with visual attention and a later diagnosis of dyslexia.
The researchers studied Italian-speaking children for a period of three years, from the time they were prereading kindergarteners until they entered second grade. Andrea Facoetti of the University of Padua in Italy, and a team including Sandro Franceschini, Simone Gori, Milena Ruffino, and Katia Pedrolli, assessed prereaders for visual spatial attention—the ability to filter relevant versus irrelevant information—through tests that asked them to pick out specific symbols amid distractions. The children also took tests on syllable identification, verbal short-term memory, and rapid color naming, followed over the next two years by measures of reading.
Those test results showed that kids who initially had trouble with visual attention were also the ones to later struggle in reading.
"Visual attention deficits are surprisingly way more predictive of future reading disorders than are language abilities at the prereading stage," said Facoetti. "This is a radical change to the theoretical framework explaining dyslexia. It forces us to rewrite what is known about the disorder and to change rehabilitation treatments in order to reduce its impact."
He says that simple visual-attention tasks should improve the early identification of children at risk for dyslexia. "Because recent studies show that specific prereading programs can improve reading abilities, children at risk for dyslexia could be treated with preventive remediation programs of visual spatial attention before they learn to read."
Published in Current Biology.
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- Greenpeace Says Its GMOs Are Better Than Science's GMOs, Still Hates Golden Rice
- Reduce Prostate Cancer Risk By Sleeping With Lots Of Women - But Not Men
- Homo Floresiensis: Hobbit Species Continues To Provoke Questions About Human Evolution
- Supersonic Laser-Propelled Aircraft Get A Step Closer
- Okay With Disgusting Images? You Vote This Way 95 Percent Of The Time
- Everyone Hates Daylight Savings Time - But It Might Improve Public Health
- This Mid-Term Election Can Have Evolutionary Consequences
- "food and energy are not major issues Are you for real???! As for the rest - well, population control..."
- "There are no Greenpeace GMOs. Go away with your bullcrap and take your GMOs with you. ..."
- "Talk about manned missions to Mars is foolishness until we've established a robot colony that has..."
- "Mars is basically a dead rock. Any life that can take hold there, good for it. Now the oceans of..."
- "Most people like average, because average is most predictable - just as frequent words and symmetrical..."
- Genetically modified clean energy from bacteria
- Designer babies: You can screen for cystic fibrosis but intelligence is a way off
- Science as profane: What superstition of 1752 and 2014 share in common
- What’s so “natural” about “natural crop breeding”?
- Worried you have cancer? Take a Google pill!
- Mars bars for brain health? Not so fast