The development of reading skill and bases of developmental dyslexia were explored using connectionist models. Four issues were examined: the acquisition of phonological knowledge prior to reading, how this knowledge facilitates learning to read, phonological and non phonological bases of dyslexia, and effects of literacy on phonological representation. Compared with simple feedforward networks, representing phonological knowledge in an attractor network yielded improved learning and generalization. Phonological and surface forms of developmental dyslexia, which are usually attributed to impairments in distinct lexical and nonlexical processing “routes,” were derived from different types of damage to the network. The results provide a computationally explicit account of many aspects of reading acquisition using connectionist principles.

This monograph discusses research, theory, and practice relevant to how children learn to read English. After an initial overview of writing systems, the discussion summarizes research from developmental psychology on children's language competency when they enter school and on the nature of early reading development. Subsequent sections review theories of learning to read, the characteristics of children who do not learn to read (i.e., who have developmental dyslexia), research from cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience on skilled reading, and connectionist models of learning to read. The implications of the research findings for learning to read and teaching reading are discussed. Next, the primary methods used to teach reading (phonics and whole language) are summarized. The final section reviews laboratory and classroom studies on teaching reading. From these different sources of evidence, two inescapable conclusions emerge: (a) Mastering the alphabetic principle (that written symbols are associated with phonemes) is essential to becoming proficient in the skill of reading, and (b) methods that teach this principle directly are more effective than those that do not (especially for children who are at risk in some way for having difficulty learning to read). Using whole-language activities to supplement phonics instruction does help make reading fun and meaningful for children, but ultimately, phonics instruction is critically important because it helps beginning readers understand the alphabetic principle and learn new words. Thus, elementary -school teachers who make the alphabetic principle explicit are most effective in helping their students become skilled, independent readers.

xi 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Intuitions and Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.2 Previous Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.2.1 The Classical Dual Route Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.2.2 Seidenberg and McClelland 1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Plaut and Shallice 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Plaut et al. 1996: Naming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Bullinaria 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1.2.6 Plaut 1997: Lexical Decision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 1.2.7 Harm and Seidenberg 1998: Naming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2 A New Computational Model 18 2.1 Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...

A connectionist model of reading development previously used to simulate detailed aspects of developmental dyslexia (Harm & Seidenberg, 1999) was used to explore why certain classes of interventions designed to overcome reading impairments are more effective than others. Previous research has shown that interventions targeting the development of spelling–sound correspondences are more effective at promoting generalization skills than ones designed solely to increase phonological awareness. The simulations broadly replicate the patterns of success and failure found in the developmental literature and provide explicit computational insights into exactly why the interventions that include training on spelling–sound regularities are more effective than those targeting phonological development alone. The number of studies of interventions targeting developmental reading impairments is growing at a rapid rate (see Bus & Ijzendoorn, 1999, for a recent review). Such studies typically involve testing one or more interventions with children; outcome measures indicate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the different interventions being considered. The benefits of such work are obvious: They give direct evidence for which of the tested interventions provide a more effective use of time and resources for the particular population of children studied. The difficulty is that

Abstract not found

Abstract not found

The integrity of phonological representation/processing in dyslexic children was explored with a gating task in which children listened to successively longer segments (gates) of a word. At each gate, the task was to decide what the entire word was. Responses were scored for overall accuracy, as well as the child’s sensitivity to coarticulation from the final consonant. As a group, dyslexic children were less able than normally achieving readers to detect coarticulation present in the vowel portion of the word, and primarily on the most difficult items, those ending in a nasal sound. Hierarchical regression and path analyses indicated that phonological awareness mediated the relationship of gating and general language ability to word and pseudoword reading ability. Developmental dyslexia is characterized by difficulty with fluency and/or accuracy of reading in the absence of serious intellectual, sensory, emotional or experiential impediments to learning (Lyon, 1995). There is a strong consensus in the field that the proximal cause of the disorder involves phonological deficits (Brady, 1997;

We investigated the relationship between dyslexia and three aspects of language: speech perception, phonology and morphology. Reading and language tasks were administered to dyslexics aged 8-9 years, and two normal reader groups (age-matched and reading-level matched). Three dyslexic groups were identified: phonological dyslexics (PD), developmentally language impaired (LI), and globally delayed (delay-type dyslexics). The LI and PD groups exhibited similar patterns of reading impairment, attributed to low phonological skills. However, only the LI group showed clear speech perception deficits, suggesting that such deficits affect only a subset of dyslexics. Results also indicated phonological impairments in children whose speech perception was normal. Both the LI and PD groups showed inflectional morphology difficulties, with the impairment being more severe in the LI group. The Delay group's reading and language skills closely matched those of younger normal readers, suggesting these children had a general delay in reading and language skills, rather than a specific phonological impairment. The results are discussed in terms of models of word recognition and dyslexia.

A word-learning task was used to investigate variation among developmental dyslexics classified as phonological and surface dyslexics. Dyslexic children and chronological age (CA)- and reading level (RL)-matched normal readers were taught to pronounce novel nonsense words such as veep. Words were assigned either a regular (e.g., "veep") or an irregular (e.g., "vip") pronunciation. Phonological dyslexics learned both regular and exception words more slowly than the normal readers and, unlike the other groups, did not show a regularword advantage. Surface dyslexics also learned regular and exception words more slowly than the CA group, consistent with a specific problem in mastering arbitrary item-specific pronunciations, but their performance resembled that of the RL group. The results parallel earlier findings from Manis,Seidenberg, Doi, McBride-Chang, & Petersen [Cognition 58 (1996) 157--195] indicating that surface dyslexics and phonological dyslexics have a di#erent profile of reading deficits, with surface dyslexics resembling younger normal readers and phonological dyslexics showing a specific phonological deficit. Models of reading and reading disability need to account for the heterogeneity in reading processes among dyslexic children.