Developmental dyslexia and the dual route model of reading: Simulating individual differences and subtypes
Abstract
Developmental dyslexia was investigated within a well-understood and fully specified computational model of reading aloud: the dual route cascaded model (DRC [Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J.C. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204-256.]). Four tasks were designed to assess each representational level of the DRC: letter level, orthographic lexicon, phonological lexicon, and phoneme system. The data showed no single cause of dyslexia, but rather a complex pattern of phonological, phonemic, and letter processing deficits. Importantly, most dyslexics had deficits in more than one domain. Subtyping analyses also suggested that both the phonological and surface dyslexics almost always had more than a single underlying deficit. To simulate the reading performance for each individual with the DRC, we added noise to the model at a level proportional to the underlying deficit(s) of each individual. The simulations not only accounted fairly well for individual reading patterns but also captured the different dyslexia profiles discussed in the literature (i.e., surface, phonological, mixed, and mild dyslexia). Thus, taking into account the multiplicity of underlying deficits on an individual basis provides a parsimonious and accurate description of developmental dyslexia. The present work highlights the necessity and merits of investigating dyslexia at the level of each indivi…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Disorders such as dyslexia hinder otherwise talented individuals from achieving educational and career goals.
“Disorders such as dyslexia hinder otherwise talented individuals from achieving educational and career goals (e.g., Meisinger, Bloom, & Hynd, 2010; Ziegler et al., 2008).”
From I. NIH TOOLBOX COGNITION BATTERY (CB): INTRODUCTION AND PEDIATRIC DATA (2013) · cites this paper as Ziegler et al., 2008
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 77 · Cited by 249
- Authors
- Ziegler, J. C., Castel, C., Pech-Georgel, C., George, F., Alario, F.-X., & Perry, C.
- Affiliations
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Hôpital de la Timone (FR)
- Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Ziegler, Johannes C.
- Venue
- Cognition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-04
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 151-178
- ISSN
- 0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2168871864
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 17.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Keywords
- developmental dyslexia, dual-route cascaded model, computational modeling of reading, individual differences, dyslexia subtypes, phonological dyslexia, surface dyslexia, phonological processing deficits, orthographic lexicon, phonological lexicon, phoneme system, noise simulation
- MeSH terms
- Child, Dyslexia, Female, Humans, Male, Periodicity, Phonetics, Reaction Time, Reading
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review