Cited by 131Reading and Literacy DevelopmentNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Evidence for a dysfunction of left posterior reading areas in German dyslexic readers.

Kronbichler, Martin, Hutzler, Florian, Staffen, Wolfgang, Mair, Alois, Ladurner, Gunther, Wimmer, Heinz·2006·Neuropsychologia

Abstract

The brain activity during a sentence reading task and a visual control task was examined with fMRI in 13 German dyslexic readers and 15 age-matched fluent readers (age: 14-16 years). These participants came from a longitudinal study and the dyslexic readers exhibited a persistent reading fluency deficit from early on. For the first time with German dyslexic readers, and in correspondence with the majority of functional imaging studies, we found reduced dyslexic activation in the left occipitotemporal cortex and in a small region of the left supramarginal gyrus. Enhanced activation was found in left inferior frontal and subcortical regions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.03.010

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Variability in fMRI findings around the occipito-temporal sulcus is unlikely to be caused by differences between orthographic systems.

    “Differences between orthographic systems are unlikely to be the reason for this variability in fMRI results, because there are both negative and positive results in both German (compare Brem et al., 2006 with Kronbichler et al., 2006) and English (compare Church et al., 2008 with Turkeltaub et al., 2003).”

    From The Development of Cortical Sensitivity to Visual Word Forms (2011) · cites this paper as Kronbichler et al., 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kronbichler, M., Hutzler, F., Staffen, W., Mair, A., Ladurner, G., & Wimmer, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Salzburg (AT)
  • University of Vienna (AT)
  • Paracelsus Medical University (AT)
Corresponding author
Wimmer, Heinz
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
44
Issue
10
Pages
1822-1832
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2037279581
Cited by
131
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
FWCI
10.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
dyslexia, occipitotemporal cortex, supramarginal gyrus, inferior frontal cortex, subcortical activation, sentence reading
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Dyslexia, Female, Germany, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Functional Laterality, Longitudinal Studies, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Photic Stimulation, Reading, Semantics, Case-Control Studies

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