We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
According to the Procedural Deficit Hypothesis, abnormalities in corticostriatal pathways could account for the language-related deficits observed in developmental dyslexia. The same neural network has also been implicated in the ability to learn contingencies based on trial and error (i.e., reinforcement learning [RL]). On this basis, the present study tested the assumption that dyslexic individuals would be impaired in RL compared with neurotypicals in two different tasks.
Methods:
In a probabilistic selection task, participants were required to learn reinforcement contingencies based on probabilistic feedback. In an implicit transitive inference task, participants were also required to base their decisions on reinforcement histories, but feedback was deterministic and stimulus pairs were partially overlapping, such that participants were required to learn hierarchical relations.
Results:
Across tasks, results revealed that although the ability to learn from positive/negative feedback did not differ between the two groups, the learning of reinforcement contingencies was poorer in the dyslexia group compared with the neurotypicals group. Furthermore, in novel test pairs where previously learned information was presented in new combinations, dyslexic individuals performed similarly to neurotypicals.
Conclusions:
Taken together, these results suggest that learning of reinforcement contingencies occurs less robustly in individuals with developmental dyslexia. Inferences for the neuro-cognitive mechanisms of developmental dyslexia are discussed.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.