Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 431

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Functional and morphometric brain dissociation between dyslexia and reading ability

Open access
Hoeft, Fumiko, Meyler, Ann, Hernandez, Arvel, Juel, Connie, Taylor-Hill, Heather, Martindale, Jennifer L., McMillon, Glenn, Kolchugina, Galena, Black, Jessica M., Faizi, Afrooz, Deutsch, Gayle K., Siok, Wai Ting, Reiss, Allan L., Whitfield-Gabrieli, Susan, Gabrieli, John D. E.·2007·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

In functional neuroimaging studies, individuals with dyslexia frequently exhibit both hypoactivation, often in the left parietotemporal cortex, and hyperactivation, often in the left inferior frontal cortex, but there has been no evidence to suggest how to interpret the differential relations of hypoactivation and hyperactivation to dyslexia. To address this question, we measured brain activation by functional MRI during visual word rhyme judgment compared with visual cross-hair fixation rest, and we measured gray matter morphology by voxel-based morphometry in dyslexic adolescents in comparison with ( i ) an age-matched group, and ( ii ) a reading-matched group younger than the dyslexic group but equal to the dyslexic group in reading performance. Relative to the age-matched group ( n = 19; mean 14.4 years), the dyslexic group ( n = 19; mean 14.4 years) exhibited hypoactivation in left parietal and bilateral fusiform cortices and hyperactivation in left inferior and middle frontal gyri, caudate, and thalamus. Relative to the reading-matched group ( n = 12; mean 9.8 years), the dyslexic group ( n = 12; mean 14.5 years) also exhibited hypoactivation in left parietal and fusiform regions but equal activation in all four areas that had exhibited hyperactivation relative to age-matched controls as well. In regions that exhibited atypical activation in the dyslexic group, only the left parietal region exhibited reduced gray matter volume relative to both control groups. Thus, areas of hyperactivation in dyslexia reflected processes related to the level of current reading ability independent of dyslexia. In contrast, areas of hypoactivation in dyslexia reflected functional atypicalities related to dyslexia itself, independent of current reading ability, and related to atypical brain morphology in dyslexia.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0609399104

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 57 references

Cited by

See all 431

Metadata

Authors
Hoeft, F., Meyler, A., Hernandez, A., Juel, C., Taylor-Hill, H., Martindale, J. L., McMillon, G., Kolchugina, G., Black, J. M., Faizi, A., Deutsch, G. K., Siok, W. T., Reiss, A. L., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S., & Gabrieli, J. D. E.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2007-03-06
Volume
104
Issue
10
Pages
4234-4239
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2041627495
Cited by
431
References
57
FWCI
36.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Functional and morphometric brain dissociation between dyslexia and reading ability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0609399104
The paper
Hoeft, F., Meyler, A., Hernandez, A., Juel, C., Taylor-Hill, H., Martindale, J. L., McMillon, G., Kolchugina, G., Black, J. M., Faizi, A., Deutsch, G. K., Siok, W. T., Reiss, A. L., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2007). Functional and morphometric brain dissociation between dyslexia and reading ability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0609399104

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.