Visual artificial grammar learning in dyslexia: A meta-analysis

Merel van Witteloostuijn · Paul Boersma · Frank N. K. Wijnen · Judith Rispens

61 citations0/0 files storedResearch in Developmental Disabilities

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Reading and Literacy Development Language Development and Disorders Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Literacy impairments in dyslexia have been hypothesized to be (partly) due to an implicit learning deficit. However, studies of implicit visual artificial grammar learning (AGL) have often yielded null results. AIMS: The aim of this study is to weigh the evidence collected thus far by performing a meta-analysis of studies on implicit visual AGL in dyslexia. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Thirteen studies were selected through a systematic literature search, representing data from 255 participants with dyslexia and 292 control participants (mean age range: 8.5-36.8 years old). RESULTS: If the 13 selected studies constitute a random sample, individuals with dyslexia perform worse on average than non-dyslexic individuals (average weighted effect size=0.46, 95% CI [0.14 … 0.77], p=0.008), with a larger effect in children than in adults (p=0.041; average weighted effect sizes 0.71 [sig.] versus 0.16 [non-sig.]). However, the presence of a publication bias indicates the existence of missing studies that may well null the effect. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: While the studies under investigation demonstrate that implicit visual AGL is impaired in dyslexia (more so in children than in adults, if in adults at all), the detected publication bias suggests that the effect might in fact be zero.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 61 citations exist upstream.

References

2013Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 1997Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test 2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement 2012Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 2010Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package 2000Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.2009Introduction to Meta‐Analysis 2000Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel‐Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis

Cited by

2021Is a procedural learning deficit a causal risk factor for developmental language disorder or dyslexia? A meta-analytic review.2019Visual statistical learning and orthographic awareness in Chinese children with and without developmental dyslexia 2019Statistical learning abilities and their relation to language 2018Individual differences in statistical learning predict children's reading ability in a semi-transparent orthography 2018The Promise—and Challenge—of Statistical Learning for Elucidating Atypical Language Development

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.