Perception of Filtered Speech by Children with Developmental Dyslexia and Children with Specific Language Impairments fpsyg XXXXXXXXXXMay 28, 2016 Time: 18:26 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 30 May...

Just choose the first experimentHere's a url of the article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4885376/I've also attached the guidelines on what should be on the paper.


Perception of Filtered Speech by Children with Developmental Dyslexia and Children with Specific Language Impairments fpsyg-07-00791 May 28, 2016 Time: 18:26 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 30 May 2016 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791 Edited by: Sonja A. Kotz, Maastricht University, Netherlands and Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Germany Reviewed by: Martin Meyer, University of Zurich, Switzerland Milene Bonte, Maastricht University, Netherlands *Correspondence: Usha Goswami [email protected] Specialty section: This article was submitted to Auditory Cognitive Neuroscience, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology Received: 16 December 2015 Accepted: 11 May 2016 Published: 30 May 2016 Citation: Goswami U, Cumming R, Chait M, Huss M, Mead N, Wilson AM, Barnes L and Fosker T (2016) Perception of Filtered Speech by Children with Developmental Dyslexia and Children with Specific Language Impairments. Front. Psychol. 7:791. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791 Perception of Filtered Speech by Children with Developmental Dyslexia and Children with Specific Language Impairments Usha Goswami1*, Ruth Cumming1, Maria Chait2, Martina Huss1, Natasha Mead1, Angela M. Wilson1, Lisa Barnes1 and Tim Fosker3 1 Centre for Neuroscience in Education, Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, 2 Ear Institute, University College London, London, UK, 3 School of Psychology, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK Here we use two filtered speech tasks to investigate children’s processing of slow (<4 hz)="" versus="" faster="" (∼33="" hz)="" temporal="" modulations="" in="" speech.="" we="" compare="" groups="" of="" children="" with="" either="" developmental="" dyslexia="" (experiment="" 1)="" or="" speech="" and="" language="" impairments="" (slis,="" experiment="" 2)="" to="" groups="" of="" typically-developing="" (td)="" children="" age-="" matched="" to="" each="" disorder="" group.="" ten="" nursery="" rhymes="" were="" filtered="" so="" that="" their="" modulation="" frequencies="" were="" either="" low-pass="" filtered=""><4 hz) or band-pass filtered (22 – 40 hz). recognition of the filtered nursery rhymes was tested in a picture recognition multiple choice paradigm. children with dyslexia aged 10 years showed equivalent recognition overall to td controls for both the low-pass and band-pass filtered stimuli, but showed significantly impaired acoustic learning during the experiment from low-pass filtered targets. children with oral slis aged 9 years showed significantly poorer recognition of band pass filtered targets compared to their td controls, and showed comparable acoustic learning effects to td children during the experiment. the sli samples were also divided into children with and without phonological difficulties. the children with both sli and phonological difficulties were impaired in recognizing both kinds of filtered speech. these data are suggestive of impaired temporal sampling of the speech signal at different modulation rates by children with different kinds of developmental language disorder. both sli and dyslexic samples showed impaired discrimination of amplitude rise times. implications of these findings for a temporal sampling framework for understanding developmental language disorders are discussed. keywords: temporal modulation, speech perception, phonology, dyslexia, sli introduction the proposal that human speech perception relies on multi-time resolution processing is increasingly well-supported by both behavioral and neuroimaging data (poeppel, 2003; greenberg, 2006; hickok and poeppel, 2007; luo and poeppel, 2007; giraud et al., 2008; ghitza and greenberg, 2009; chait et al., 2015). according to multi-time resolution models, the brain tracks the temporal modulation patterns in speech at different timescales simultaneously, via phase-locking of intrinsic cortical oscillations to modulations at corresponding timescales frontiers in psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 may 2016 | volume 7 | article 791 http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/ http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/editorialboard http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/editorialboard http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2016-05-30 http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791/abstract http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/40969/overview http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/46969/overview http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/51185/overview http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/253962/overview http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/51223/overview http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/10597/overview http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/ http://www.frontiersin.org/ http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/archive fpsyg-07-00791 may 28, 2016 time: 18:26 # 2 goswami et al. temporal modulation processing in dyslexia and sli in the signal (ghitza, 2011; giraud and poeppel, 2012; poeppel, 2014). endogenous neuronal oscillations in frequency bands at ‘privileged’ rates for speech (delta, 1 – 3 hz, theta, 4 – 8 hz, beta, 15 – 30 hz, and low gamma, 30 – 50 hz; rates from poeppel, 2014) appear to provide a basis for parsing the continuous signal into linguistically relevant units (e.g., delta – syllable stress patterns, theta – syllables, beta – onset-rime units, low gamma – phonetic information, see ghitza et al., 2012; poeppel, 2014; leong and goswami, 2015). the information associated with the different timescales is then bound together to give the final speech percept. accurate oscillatory phase locking is mediated in part by amplitude ‘rise times,’ auditory ‘edges’ associated with amplitude (energy) modulations in the continuous signal that help to specify temporal modulation rates (gross et al., 2013; doelling et al., 2014). rise times appear to phase re-set neuronal activity, enabling accurate ‘sampling’ of the speech input in different temporal integration windows simultaneously, thereby supporting the parsing and encoding/decoding of speech (luo and poeppel, 2007; poeppel, 2014). logically, impairments in this simultaneous ‘sampling’ of the speech signal at one or more temporal rates could be a causal factor in developmental disorders of language learning. atypical neural sampling at one or more of the ‘privileged’ temporal rates for speech would result in subtly different acoustic information being bound together to yield the final speech percept. such a model is proposed by the neural ‘temporal sampling’ framework for understanding developmental language disorders (tsf, goswami, 2011). the tsf proposed that the sensory impairments in discriminating amplitude envelope (ae) rise times found in children with developmental language disorders could affect the efficiency of neuronal phase-resetting and the accuracy of neuronal entrainment to the energy patterns in speech. this would result in atypical perceptual representations, which would affect phonological development (as in developmental dyslexia), and possibly also syntactic and grammatical development (as in oral speech and language disorders). psychoacoustic studies of children with language learning disorders consistently find impaired discrimination of non-speech ae rise times, for children with both developmental dyslexia (disordered acquisition of written language) and children with oral slis (disordered comprehension and production of oral language). for developmental dyslexia, studies in a range of languages (english, french, spanish, chinese, dutch, finnish and hungarian, see goswami, 2015 for a review of sensory data) have shown that impaired discrimination of ae rise time is related to impairments in phonological processing at multiple linguistic levels (stressed syllable, syllable, onset-rime, chinese tone, phoneme, “rise time theory,” see goswami, 2015). for sli, psychoacoustic studies have so far focused on english-speaking children (corriveau et al., 2007; fraser et al., 2010; beattie and manis, 2012; cumming et al., 2015a; richards and goswami, 2015). in english-speaking children with slis, ae rise time impairments are consistently associated with phonological impairments, and are less consistently associated with receptive and expressive language impairments. importantly for the neural temporal sampling approach, there is fierce debate in the developmental literature concerning whether these two developmental disorders of language learning (developmental dyslexia and oral slis) lie on a continuum or are distinct disorders with differing etiology. for example, an influential literature review argued that despite the many behavioral similarities in children with the two disorders, sli and dyslexia were best conceptualized as independent developmental syndromes (bishop and snowling, 2004). bishop and snowling (2004) argued that classic sli and classic dyslexia were different in their characteristics. classically dyslexia is always associated with oral phonological processing impairments, while processing of the semantic and syntactic aspects of oral language are typically preserved. conversely, classically sli is always associated with non-phonological language impairments (e.g., in the production and comprehension of spoken language), but is not consistently associated with phonological impairments. bishop and snowling (2004) emphasized that developmental disorders that appear similar at the behavioral level may have different causal origins and may require different remediation. at the same time, some studies demonstrate overlap of over 50% in the reading and language scores of children diagnosed with either sli or dyslexia (e.g., mcarthur et al., 2000). mcarthur et al. (2000) and her colleagues reported that in a sample of 110 children with language impairments, 55% of those with a diagnosis of dyslexia also had oral language difficulties, while 51% of those with a diagnosis of sli also had reading impairments. given that both disorders (developmental dyslexia and sli) show high heritability, any shared causal origins seem most likely to be linked to universal features of linguistic processing, such as the neural tracking of the different temporal modulation patterns in the speech envelope revealed by multi-time resolution models (poeppel, 2014). temporal sampling theory (goswami, 2011, 2015) has highlighted the prosodic and syllable-level perceptual difficulties found in children with sli and developmental dyslexia, theoretically associated with processing slower temporal modulations. children with developmental dyslexia show perceptual difficulties in discriminating amplitude modulation (am) and frequency modulation (fm) across languages, with some studies suggestive of more marked deficits at slower rates (e.g., 4 hz am, french, lorenzi et al., 2000; 2 hz fm; english, witton et al., 1998; 2 hz fm, norwegian, talcott et al., 2003). english children with dyslexia also show impaired neuronal oscillatory entrainment to rhythmic speech presented at a 2 hz (delta band) rate (power et al., 2013). meanwhile, prosodic difficulties can be identified in individuals with dyslexia across languages (english: goswami et al., 2010, 2013; spanish: jiminez-fernandez et al., 2014; french: soroli et al., 2010). a sensory/neural difficulty in developmental dyslexia centered around slow temporal modulations is thus reasonably well- supported. auditory studies of sli have focused on a theory proposed by tallal and piercy (1973), which argued for difficulties in processing rapidly arriving acoustic information. tallal’s ‘rapid auditory processing’ hypothesis (tallal, 1980) was based on the finding that children with sli were worse than td controls in processing the temporal order of sounds when the sounds were brief (75 ms) with short (e.g., 8, 15, 30, 60 ms) interstimulus intervals (isis, tallal and piercy, 1973). the children with sli did frontiers in psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 may 2016 | volume 7 | article 791 http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/ http://www.frontiersin.org/ http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/archive fpsyg-07-00791 may 28, 2016 time: 18:26 # 3 goswami et al. temporal modulation processing in dyslexia and sli not differ from td controls when isis were longer than 150 ms. the rap hypothesis proposed that as the timeframe of 75 ms corresponds to the average duration of individual phonemes, a rap deficit caused poor phonological representation of phonemes and therefore subsequent language difficulties for affected children. rap theory has been the subject of much debate since its proposal, with some studies replicating its findings in children with slis (e.g., frumkin and rapin, 1980), and others failing to find a rap deficit in these children (e.g., hz)="" or="" band-pass="" filtered="" (22="" –="" 40="" hz).="" recognition="" of="" the="" filtered="" nursery="" rhymes="" was="" tested="" in="" a="" picture="" recognition="" multiple="" choice="" paradigm.="" children="" with="" dyslexia="" aged="" 10="" years="" showed="" equivalent="" recognition="" overall="" to="" td="" controls="" for="" both="" the="" low-pass="" and="" band-pass="" filtered="" stimuli,="" but="" showed="" significantly="" impaired="" acoustic="" learning="" during="" the="" experiment="" from="" low-pass="" filtered="" targets.="" children="" with="" oral="" slis="" aged="" 9="" years="" showed="" significantly="" poorer="" recognition="" of="" band="" pass="" filtered="" targets="" compared="" to="" their="" td="" controls,="" and="" showed="" comparable="" acoustic="" learning="" effects="" to="" td="" children="" during="" the="" experiment.="" the="" sli="" samples="" were="" also="" divided="" into="" children="" with="" and="" without="" phonological="" difficulties.="" the="" children="" with="" both="" sli="" and="" phonological="" difficulties="" were="" impaired="" in="" recognizing="" both="" kinds="" of="" filtered="" speech.="" these="" data="" are="" suggestive="" of="" impaired="" temporal="" sampling="" of="" the="" speech="" signal="" at="" different="" modulation="" rates="" by="" children="" with="" different="" kinds="" of="" developmental="" language="" disorder.="" both="" sli="" and="" dyslexic="" samples="" showed="" impaired="" discrimination="" of="" amplitude="" rise="" times.="" implications="" of="" these="" findings="" for="" a="" temporal="" sampling="" framework="" for="" understanding="" developmental="" language="" disorders="" are="" discussed.="" keywords:="" temporal="" modulation,="" speech="" perception,="" phonology,="" dyslexia,="" sli="" introduction="" the="" proposal="" that="" human="" speech="" perception="" relies="" on="" multi-time="" resolution="" processing="" is="" increasingly="" well-supported="" by="" both="" behavioral="" and="" neuroimaging="" data="" (poeppel,="" 2003;="" greenberg,="" 2006;="" hickok="" and="" poeppel,="" 2007;="" luo="" and="" poeppel,="" 2007;="" giraud="" et="" al.,="" 2008;="" ghitza="" and="" greenberg,="" 2009;="" chait="" et="" al.,="" 2015).="" according="" to="" multi-time="" resolution="" models,="" the="" brain="" tracks="" the="" temporal="" modulation="" patterns="" in="" speech="" at="" different="" timescales="" simultaneously,="" via="" phase-locking="" of="" intrinsic="" cortical="" oscillations="" to="" modulations="" at="" corresponding="" timescales="" frontiers="" in="" psychology="" |="" www.frontiersin.org="" 1="" may="" 2016="" |="" volume="" 7="" |="" article="" 791="" http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/="" http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/editorialboard="" http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/editorialboard="" http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791="" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/="" http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791="" http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi="10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2016-05-30" http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00791/abstract="" http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/40969/overview="" http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/46969/overview="" http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/51185/overview="" http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/253962/overview="" http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/51223/overview="" http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/10597/overview="" http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/="" http://www.frontiersin.org/="" http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/archive="" fpsyg-07-00791="" may="" 28,="" 2016="" time:="" 18:26="" #="" 2="" goswami="" et="" al.="" temporal="" modulation="" processing="" in="" dyslexia="" and="" sli="" in="" the="" signal="" (ghitza,="" 2011;="" giraud="" and="" poeppel,="" 2012;="" poeppel,="" 2014).="" endogenous="" neuronal="" oscillations="" in="" frequency="" bands="" at="" ‘privileged’="" rates="" for="" speech="" (delta,="" 1="" –="" 3="" hz,="" theta,="" 4="" –="" 8="" hz,="" beta,="" 15="" –="" 30="" hz,="" and="" low="" gamma,="" 30="" –="" 50="" hz;="" rates="" from="" poeppel,="" 2014)="" appear="" to="" provide="" a="" basis="" for="" parsing="" the="" continuous="" signal="" into="" linguistically="" relevant="" units="" (e.g.,="" delta="" –="" syllable="" stress="" patterns,="" theta="" –="" syllables,="" beta="" –="" onset-rime="" units,="" low="" gamma="" –="" phonetic="" information,="" see="" ghitza="" et="" al.,="" 2012;="" poeppel,="" 2014;="" leong="" and="" goswami,="" 2015).="" the="" information="" associated="" with="" the="" different="" timescales="" is="" then="" bound="" together="" to="" give="" the="" final="" speech="" percept.="" accurate="" oscillatory="" phase="" locking="" is="" mediated="" in="" part="" by="" amplitude="" ‘rise="" times,’="" auditory="" ‘edges’="" associated="" with="" amplitude="" (energy)="" modulations="" in="" the="" continuous="" signal="" that="" help="" to="" specify="" temporal="" modulation="" rates="" (gross="" et="" al.,="" 2013;="" doelling="" et="" al.,="" 2014).="" rise="" times="" appear="" to="" phase="" re-set="" neuronal="" activity,="" enabling="" accurate="" ‘sampling’="" of="" the="" speech="" input="" in="" different="" temporal="" integration="" windows="" simultaneously,="" thereby="" supporting="" the="" parsing="" and="" encoding/decoding="" of="" speech="" (luo="" and="" poeppel,="" 2007;="" poeppel,="" 2014).="" logically,="" impairments="" in="" this="" simultaneous="" ‘sampling’="" of="" the="" speech="" signal="" at="" one="" or="" more="" temporal="" rates="" could="" be="" a="" causal="" factor="" in="" developmental="" disorders="" of="" language="" learning.="" atypical="" neural="" sampling="" at="" one="" or="" more="" of="" the="" ‘privileged’="" temporal="" rates="" for="" speech="" would="" result="" in="" subtly="" different="" acoustic="" information="" being="" bound="" together="" to="" yield="" the="" final="" speech="" percept.="" such="" a="" model="" is="" proposed="" by="" the="" neural="" ‘temporal="" sampling’="" framework="" for="" understanding="" developmental="" language="" disorders="" (tsf,="" goswami,="" 2011).="" the="" tsf="" proposed="" that="" the="" sensory="" impairments="" in="" discriminating="" amplitude="" envelope="" (ae)="" rise="" times="" found="" in="" children="" with="" developmental="" language="" disorders="" could="" affect="" the="" efficiency="" of="" neuronal="" phase-resetting="" and="" the="" accuracy="" of="" neuronal="" entrainment="" to="" the="" energy="" patterns="" in="" speech.="" this="" would="" result="" in="" atypical="" perceptual="" representations,="" which="" would="" affect="" phonological="" development="" (as="" in="" developmental="" dyslexia),="" and="" possibly="" also="" syntactic="" and="" grammatical="" development="" (as="" in="" oral="" speech="" and="" language="" disorders).="" psychoacoustic="" studies="" of="" children="" with="" language="" learning="" disorders="" consistently="" find="" impaired="" discrimination="" of="" non-speech="" ae="" rise="" times,="" for="" children="" with="" both="" developmental="" dyslexia="" (disordered="" acquisition="" of="" written="" language)="" and="" children="" with="" oral="" slis="" (disordered="" comprehension="" and="" production="" of="" oral="" language).="" for="" developmental="" dyslexia,="" studies="" in="" a="" range="" of="" languages="" (english,="" french,="" spanish,="" chinese,="" dutch,="" finnish="" and="" hungarian,="" see="" goswami,="" 2015="" for="" a="" review="" of="" sensory="" data)="" have="" shown="" that="" impaired="" discrimination="" of="" ae="" rise="" time="" is="" related="" to="" impairments="" in="" phonological="" processing="" at="" multiple="" linguistic="" levels="" (stressed="" syllable,="" syllable,="" onset-rime,="" chinese="" tone,="" phoneme,="" “rise="" time="" theory,”="" see="" goswami,="" 2015).="" for="" sli,="" psychoacoustic="" studies="" have="" so="" far="" focused="" on="" english-speaking="" children="" (corriveau="" et="" al.,="" 2007;="" fraser="" et="" al.,="" 2010;="" beattie="" and="" manis,="" 2012;="" cumming="" et="" al.,="" 2015a;="" richards="" and="" goswami,="" 2015).="" in="" english-speaking="" children="" with="" slis,="" ae="" rise="" time="" impairments="" are="" consistently="" associated="" with="" phonological="" impairments,="" and="" are="" less="" consistently="" associated="" with="" receptive="" and="" expressive="" language="" impairments.="" importantly="" for="" the="" neural="" temporal="" sampling="" approach,="" there="" is="" fierce="" debate="" in="" the="" developmental="" literature="" concerning="" whether="" these="" two="" developmental="" disorders="" of="" language="" learning="" (developmental="" dyslexia="" and="" oral="" slis)="" lie="" on="" a="" continuum="" or="" are="" distinct="" disorders="" with="" differing="" etiology.="" for="" example,="" an="" influential="" literature="" review="" argued="" that="" despite="" the="" many="" behavioral="" similarities="" in="" children="" with="" the="" two="" disorders,="" sli="" and="" dyslexia="" were="" best="" conceptualized="" as="" independent="" developmental="" syndromes="" (bishop="" and="" snowling,="" 2004).="" bishop="" and="" snowling="" (2004)="" argued="" that="" classic="" sli="" and="" classic="" dyslexia="" were="" different="" in="" their="" characteristics.="" classically="" dyslexia="" is="" always="" associated="" with="" oral="" phonological="" processing="" impairments,="" while="" processing="" of="" the="" semantic="" and="" syntactic="" aspects="" of="" oral="" language="" are="" typically="" preserved.="" conversely,="" classically="" sli="" is="" always="" associated="" with="" non-phonological="" language="" impairments="" (e.g.,="" in="" the="" production="" and="" comprehension="" of="" spoken="" language),="" but="" is="" not="" consistently="" associated="" with="" phonological="" impairments.="" bishop="" and="" snowling="" (2004)="" emphasized="" that="" developmental="" disorders="" that="" appear="" similar="" at="" the="" behavioral="" level="" may="" have="" different="" causal="" origins="" and="" may="" require="" different="" remediation.="" at="" the="" same="" time,="" some="" studies="" demonstrate="" overlap="" of="" over="" 50%="" in="" the="" reading="" and="" language="" scores="" of="" children="" diagnosed="" with="" either="" sli="" or="" dyslexia="" (e.g.,="" mcarthur="" et="" al.,="" 2000).="" mcarthur="" et="" al.="" (2000)="" and="" her="" colleagues="" reported="" that="" in="" a="" sample="" of="" 110="" children="" with="" language="" impairments,="" 55%="" of="" those="" with="" a="" diagnosis="" of="" dyslexia="" also="" had="" oral="" language="" difficulties,="" while="" 51%="" of="" those="" with="" a="" diagnosis="" of="" sli="" also="" had="" reading="" impairments.="" given="" that="" both="" disorders="" (developmental="" dyslexia="" and="" sli)="" show="" high="" heritability,="" any="" shared="" causal="" origins="" seem="" most="" likely="" to="" be="" linked="" to="" universal="" features="" of="" linguistic="" processing,="" such="" as="" the="" neural="" tracking="" of="" the="" different="" temporal="" modulation="" patterns="" in="" the="" speech="" envelope="" revealed="" by="" multi-time="" resolution="" models="" (poeppel,="" 2014).="" temporal="" sampling="" theory="" (goswami,="" 2011,="" 2015)="" has="" highlighted="" the="" prosodic="" and="" syllable-level="" perceptual="" difficulties="" found="" in="" children="" with="" sli="" and="" developmental="" dyslexia,="" theoretically="" associated="" with="" processing="" slower="" temporal="" modulations.="" children="" with="" developmental="" dyslexia="" show="" perceptual="" difficulties="" in="" discriminating="" amplitude="" modulation="" (am)="" and="" frequency="" modulation="" (fm)="" across="" languages,="" with="" some="" studies="" suggestive="" of="" more="" marked="" deficits="" at="" slower="" rates="" (e.g.,="" 4="" hz="" am,="" french,="" lorenzi="" et="" al.,="" 2000;="" 2="" hz="" fm;="" english,="" witton="" et="" al.,="" 1998;="" 2="" hz="" fm,="" norwegian,="" talcott="" et="" al.,="" 2003).="" english="" children="" with="" dyslexia="" also="" show="" impaired="" neuronal="" oscillatory="" entrainment="" to="" rhythmic="" speech="" presented="" at="" a="" 2="" hz="" (delta="" band)="" rate="" (power="" et="" al.,="" 2013).="" meanwhile,="" prosodic="" difficulties="" can="" be="" identified="" in="" individuals="" with="" dyslexia="" across="" languages="" (english:="" goswami="" et="" al.,="" 2010,="" 2013;="" spanish:="" jiminez-fernandez="" et="" al.,="" 2014;="" french:="" soroli="" et="" al.,="" 2010).="" a="" sensory/neural="" difficulty="" in="" developmental="" dyslexia="" centered="" around="" slow="" temporal="" modulations="" is="" thus="" reasonably="" well-="" supported.="" auditory="" studies="" of="" sli="" have="" focused="" on="" a="" theory="" proposed="" by="" tallal="" and="" piercy="" (1973),="" which="" argued="" for="" difficulties="" in="" processing="" rapidly="" arriving="" acoustic="" information.="" tallal’s="" ‘rapid="" auditory="" processing’="" hypothesis="" (tallal,="" 1980)="" was="" based="" on="" the="" finding="" that="" children="" with="" sli="" were="" worse="" than="" td="" controls="" in="" processing="" the="" temporal="" order="" of="" sounds="" when="" the="" sounds="" were="" brief="" (75="" ms)="" with="" short="" (e.g.,="" 8,="" 15,="" 30,="" 60="" ms)="" interstimulus="" intervals="" (isis,="" tallal="" and="" piercy,="" 1973).="" the="" children="" with="" sli="" did="" frontiers="" in="" psychology="" |="" www.frontiersin.org="" 2="" may="" 2016="" |="" volume="" 7="" |="" article="" 791="" http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/="" http://www.frontiersin.org/="" http://www.frontiersin.org/psychology/archive="" fpsyg-07-00791="" may="" 28,="" 2016="" time:="" 18:26="" #="" 3="" goswami="" et="" al.="" temporal="" modulation="" processing="" in="" dyslexia="" and="" sli="" not="" differ="" from="" td="" controls="" when="" isis="" were="" longer="" than="" 150="" ms.="" the="" rap="" hypothesis="" proposed="" that="" as="" the="" timeframe="" of="" 75="" ms="" corresponds="" to="" the="" average="" duration="" of="" individual="" phonemes,="" a="" rap="" deficit="" caused="" poor="" phonological="" representation="" of="" phonemes="" and="" therefore="" subsequent="" language="" difficulties="" for="" affected="" children.="" rap="" theory="" has="" been="" the="" subject="" of="" much="" debate="" since="" its="" proposal,="" with="" some="" studies="" replicating="" its="" findings="" in="" children="" with="" slis="" (e.g.,="" frumkin="" and="" rapin,="" 1980),="" and="" others="" failing="" to="" find="" a="" rap="" deficit="" in="" these="" children="">
Feb 19, 2021
SOLUTION.PDF

Get Answer To This Question