The N400 in readers with dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The N400 in readers with dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess whether (i) significant differences exist in the N400 response to lexico-semantic tasks between typically developing (TD) readers and readers with dyslexia, and (ii) whether these differences are moderated by the modality of task presentation...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of psychophysiology 2024-02, Vol.196, p.112283-112283, Article 112283
Hauptverfasser: Basma, Badriah, Savage, Robert, Bertone, Armando
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 112283
container_issue
container_start_page 112283
container_title International journal of psychophysiology
container_volume 196
creator Basma, Badriah
Savage, Robert
Bertone, Armando
description This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess whether (i) significant differences exist in the N400 response to lexico-semantic tasks between typically developing (TD) readers and readers with dyslexia, and (ii) whether these differences are moderated by the modality of task presentation (visual vs. auditory), the type of task, age, or opaque orthography (shallow and transparent alphabets vs Chinese morpho-syllabary). Twenty studies were included in the meta-analysis, and the analysis did not demonstrate strong evidence of publication bias. An overall effect size of Hedge's g = 0.66, p 
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.112283
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2905524642</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2905524642</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c311t-533e93ea1f5d86ca1612b913c7b2c2e86b6d4cd33ab36214fd7d8233041995763</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kD1PwzAURS0EoqXwFyqPLAl-dmI7bFUFFKmCpcyWYzuqo3yUOKXk35OqLdNdzn3v6iA0BxIDAf5Uxr7chcFs25gSymIASiW7QlOQgkaCZ-IaTUdQRFJwMkF3IZSEEAFZdosmTAKVHPgUrTZbhz8SQrBvcOe0dV3AB99vsR1C5X69fsYLHIbQu1r33ozMj3cHrBuLa9frSDe6GoIP9-im0FVwD-ecoa_Xl81yFa0_396Xi3VkGEAfpYy5jDkNRWolNxo40DwDZkRODXWS59wmxjKmc8YpJIUVVlLGSDIuTwVnM_R4urvr2u-9C72qfTCuqnTj2n1QNCNpShOe0BHlJ9R0bQidK9Su87XuBgVEHS2qUl0sqqNFdbI4FufnH_u8dva_dtHG_gAYCG8Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2905524642</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The N400 in readers with dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Basma, Badriah ; Savage, Robert ; Bertone, Armando</creator><creatorcontrib>Basma, Badriah ; Savage, Robert ; Bertone, Armando</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess whether (i) significant differences exist in the N400 response to lexico-semantic tasks between typically developing (TD) readers and readers with dyslexia, and (ii) whether these differences are moderated by the modality of task presentation (visual vs. auditory), the type of task, age, or opaque orthography (shallow and transparent alphabets vs Chinese morpho-syllabary). Twenty studies were included in the meta-analysis, and the analysis did not demonstrate strong evidence of publication bias. An overall effect size of Hedge's g = 0.66, p < .001, was found between typically developing readers and readers with dyslexia. All moderators were found to be significant; larger effects were associated with visual modality (g = 0.692, p < .001), semantically incongruent sentence tasks (g = 0.948, p < .001), pseudowords/characters tasks (g = 0.971, p < .001), and orthography [Chinese (g = 1.015, p < .001) vs. alphabets (g = 0.539, p < .001)]. Analysis of reaction time showed Hedge's g = 1.613, p < .001. Results suggest that the N400 reliably differentiated between typically developing readers and readers with dyslexia. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 0167-8760</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7697</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.112283</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38128616</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands</publisher><ispartof>International journal of psychophysiology, 2024-02, Vol.196, p.112283-112283, Article 112283</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c311t-533e93ea1f5d86ca1612b913c7b2c2e86b6d4cd33ab36214fd7d8233041995763</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c311t-533e93ea1f5d86ca1612b913c7b2c2e86b6d4cd33ab36214fd7d8233041995763</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27907,27908</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38128616$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Basma, Badriah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Savage, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bertone, Armando</creatorcontrib><title>The N400 in readers with dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>International journal of psychophysiology</title><addtitle>Int J Psychophysiol</addtitle><description><![CDATA[This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess whether (i) significant differences exist in the N400 response to lexico-semantic tasks between typically developing (TD) readers and readers with dyslexia, and (ii) whether these differences are moderated by the modality of task presentation (visual vs. auditory), the type of task, age, or opaque orthography (shallow and transparent alphabets vs Chinese morpho-syllabary). Twenty studies were included in the meta-analysis, and the analysis did not demonstrate strong evidence of publication bias. An overall effect size of Hedge's g = 0.66, p < .001, was found between typically developing readers and readers with dyslexia. All moderators were found to be significant; larger effects were associated with visual modality (g = 0.692, p < .001), semantically incongruent sentence tasks (g = 0.948, p < .001), pseudowords/characters tasks (g = 0.971, p < .001), and orthography [Chinese (g = 1.015, p < .001) vs. alphabets (g = 0.539, p < .001)]. Analysis of reaction time showed Hedge's g = 1.613, p < .001. Results suggest that the N400 reliably differentiated between typically developing readers and readers with dyslexia. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.]]></description><issn>0167-8760</issn><issn>1872-7697</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kD1PwzAURS0EoqXwFyqPLAl-dmI7bFUFFKmCpcyWYzuqo3yUOKXk35OqLdNdzn3v6iA0BxIDAf5Uxr7chcFs25gSymIASiW7QlOQgkaCZ-IaTUdQRFJwMkF3IZSEEAFZdosmTAKVHPgUrTZbhz8SQrBvcOe0dV3AB99vsR1C5X69fsYLHIbQu1r33ozMj3cHrBuLa9frSDe6GoIP9-im0FVwD-ecoa_Xl81yFa0_396Xi3VkGEAfpYy5jDkNRWolNxo40DwDZkRODXWS59wmxjKmc8YpJIUVVlLGSDIuTwVnM_R4urvr2u-9C72qfTCuqnTj2n1QNCNpShOe0BHlJ9R0bQidK9Su87XuBgVEHS2qUl0sqqNFdbI4FufnH_u8dva_dtHG_gAYCG8Q</recordid><startdate>20240201</startdate><enddate>20240201</enddate><creator>Basma, Badriah</creator><creator>Savage, Robert</creator><creator>Bertone, Armando</creator><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240201</creationdate><title>The N400 in readers with dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Basma, Badriah ; Savage, Robert ; Bertone, Armando</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c311t-533e93ea1f5d86ca1612b913c7b2c2e86b6d4cd33ab36214fd7d8233041995763</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Basma, Badriah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Savage, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bertone, Armando</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of psychophysiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Basma, Badriah</au><au>Savage, Robert</au><au>Bertone, Armando</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The N400 in readers with dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>International journal of psychophysiology</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Psychophysiol</addtitle><date>2024-02-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>196</volume><spage>112283</spage><epage>112283</epage><pages>112283-112283</pages><artnum>112283</artnum><issn>0167-8760</issn><eissn>1872-7697</eissn><abstract><![CDATA[This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess whether (i) significant differences exist in the N400 response to lexico-semantic tasks between typically developing (TD) readers and readers with dyslexia, and (ii) whether these differences are moderated by the modality of task presentation (visual vs. auditory), the type of task, age, or opaque orthography (shallow and transparent alphabets vs Chinese morpho-syllabary). Twenty studies were included in the meta-analysis, and the analysis did not demonstrate strong evidence of publication bias. An overall effect size of Hedge's g = 0.66, p < .001, was found between typically developing readers and readers with dyslexia. All moderators were found to be significant; larger effects were associated with visual modality (g = 0.692, p < .001), semantically incongruent sentence tasks (g = 0.948, p < .001), pseudowords/characters tasks (g = 0.971, p < .001), and orthography [Chinese (g = 1.015, p < .001) vs. alphabets (g = 0.539, p < .001)]. Analysis of reaction time showed Hedge's g = 1.613, p < .001. Results suggest that the N400 reliably differentiated between typically developing readers and readers with dyslexia. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.]]></abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pmid>38128616</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.112283</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0167-8760
ispartof International journal of psychophysiology, 2024-02, Vol.196, p.112283-112283, Article 112283
issn 0167-8760
1872-7697
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2905524642
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
title The N400 in readers with dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T20%3A43%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20N400%20in%20readers%20with%20dyslexia:%20A%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20psychophysiology&rft.au=Basma,%20Badriah&rft.date=2024-02-01&rft.volume=196&rft.spage=112283&rft.epage=112283&rft.pages=112283-112283&rft.artnum=112283&rft.issn=0167-8760&rft.eissn=1872-7697&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.112283&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2905524642%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2905524642&rft_id=info:pmid/38128616&rfr_iscdi=true