主要思想识别的个体差异:单语和双语阅读障碍患者的脑电图研究

IF 2.6 1区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Lêda Maria Braga Tomitch, Veema Lodhia, Denise Neumann, Nasrin Zamani Foroushani, Karen E. Waldie
{"title":"主要思想识别的个体差异:单语和双语阅读障碍患者的脑电图研究","authors":"Lêda Maria Braga Tomitch, Veema Lodhia, Denise Neumann, Nasrin Zamani Foroushani, Karen E. Waldie","doi":"10.1017/s1366728925100321","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Individuals differ in a range of processes related to reading comprehension, including working memory capacity, decoding skills, inference making and main idea identification. In this exploratory study, we examined evoked potential N400 amplitude during reading comprehension tasks and focused on identifying the main idea in the text, modulated by working memory capacity. Participants included monolinguals or bilinguals who were either typical readers (<span>n</span> = 33) or had been diagnosed with dyslexia (<span>n</span> = 19). Analyses revealed significant group differences for main idea conditions. Participants with dyslexia showed greater N400 amplitude than typical readers, particularly in the right hemisphere, when the main idea was in the last position in the paragraph. There were no significant differences in performance between bilinguals and monolinguals, which does not support the idea of a cognitive advantage for bilingualism. It was noteworthy that, if they had dyslexia, they were similarly negatively impacted by their reading disability. Findings highlight the processing advantages typical readers have relative to dyslexia.</p>","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":"313 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Individual differences in main idea identification: An EEG study of monolinguals and bilinguals with dyslexia\",\"authors\":\"Lêda Maria Braga Tomitch, Veema Lodhia, Denise Neumann, Nasrin Zamani Foroushani, Karen E. Waldie\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1366728925100321\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Individuals differ in a range of processes related to reading comprehension, including working memory capacity, decoding skills, inference making and main idea identification. In this exploratory study, we examined evoked potential N400 amplitude during reading comprehension tasks and focused on identifying the main idea in the text, modulated by working memory capacity. Participants included monolinguals or bilinguals who were either typical readers (<span>n</span> = 33) or had been diagnosed with dyslexia (<span>n</span> = 19). Analyses revealed significant group differences for main idea conditions. Participants with dyslexia showed greater N400 amplitude than typical readers, particularly in the right hemisphere, when the main idea was in the last position in the paragraph. There were no significant differences in performance between bilinguals and monolinguals, which does not support the idea of a cognitive advantage for bilingualism. It was noteworthy that, if they had dyslexia, they were similarly negatively impacted by their reading disability. Findings highlight the processing advantages typical readers have relative to dyslexia.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition\",\"volume\":\"313 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728925100321\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728925100321","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

个体在与阅读理解相关的一系列过程中存在差异,包括工作记忆容量、解码技能、推理和主旨识别。在这项探索性研究中,我们在阅读理解任务中检测了诱发电位N400振幅,并重点研究了在工作记忆容量的调节下识别文本的主要思想。参与者包括单语或双语者,他们要么是典型的阅读者(n = 33),要么被诊断患有阅读障碍(n = 19)。分析显示各组在主要思想条件上存在显著差异。有阅读障碍的参与者比普通读者表现出更大的N400振幅,特别是当主要思想在段落的最后一个位置时,右半球的N400振幅更大。双语者和单语者在表现上没有显著差异,这并不支持双语者具有认知优势的观点。值得注意的是,如果他们有阅读障碍,他们同样会受到阅读障碍的负面影响。研究结果强调了典型读者相对于阅读障碍的处理优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Individual differences in main idea identification: An EEG study of monolinguals and bilinguals with dyslexia

Individuals differ in a range of processes related to reading comprehension, including working memory capacity, decoding skills, inference making and main idea identification. In this exploratory study, we examined evoked potential N400 amplitude during reading comprehension tasks and focused on identifying the main idea in the text, modulated by working memory capacity. Participants included monolinguals or bilinguals who were either typical readers (n = 33) or had been diagnosed with dyslexia (n = 19). Analyses revealed significant group differences for main idea conditions. Participants with dyslexia showed greater N400 amplitude than typical readers, particularly in the right hemisphere, when the main idea was in the last position in the paragraph. There were no significant differences in performance between bilinguals and monolinguals, which does not support the idea of a cognitive advantage for bilingualism. It was noteworthy that, if they had dyslexia, they were similarly negatively impacted by their reading disability. Findings highlight the processing advantages typical readers have relative to dyslexia.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
86
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信