title: An investigation of some sensory and refractive visual factors in dyslexia.
abstract: The role of visual factors in dyslexia has been a long-standing source of controversy. Recent research has suggested that there may be a deficit of the transient visual subsystem in dyslexia. The evidence for this hypothesis comes principally from investigations of spatial and temporal contrast sensitivity and visual persistence. This evidence is reviewed and it is noted that previous work has never applied two of these purported "tests of transient function" to the same subject group. The hypothesised transient system deficit in dyslexia was investigated in a study comparing 43 control with 39 dyslexic children who were matched for age, sex, and intelligence. Comprehensive psychometric and optometric data were obtained, including visual acuities and refractive errors. The spatial contrast sensitivity function was determined in such a way as to investigate further the findings of Lovegrove, Martin, Bowling, Blackwood, Badcock and Paxton [(1982) Neuropsychology, 20, 309-315] and Martin and Lovegrove [(1984) Neuropsychologia, 22, 73-77]. It might be expected, from the work of Merigan and Maunsell [(1990) Neuroscience, 5, 347-352], that a better test of magno-cellular function would be to investigate the modulation threshold for a virtually uniform field that was flickering sinusoidally at 10 Hz. This temporal contrast sensitivity was studied in a similar way to Brannan and Williams [(1988) Clinical Vision Sciences, 3, 137-142]. A non-verbal simulated reading visual search task was used to investigate the effect of any visual deficits on a test that was, in its low-level visual requirements, similar to reading. The following factors were found to be significantly associated with dyslexia: reduced visual acuity, impaired flicker detection at 10 Hz, reduced low spatial frequency contrast sensitivity, and slightly slower performance at a simulated reading visual search task. The two alleged "tests of transient function" were only weakly correlated with one another (r = 0.183), suggesting that these variables do not measure the same function. Much of the dyslexic group's slightly slower performance at the simulated reading task could be accounted for by the psychometric variable of visual sequential memory. Like reading, the simulated reading task requires the accurate perception of sequential characters. Hence, it seems unlikely that the low-level visual deficits in the dyslexic group were major causes of their poor reading performance. Alternative explanations for the results are discussed.
authors.affiliation: Department of Vision Sciences, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham, England.
authors.forename: B J
authors.initials: BJ
authors.lastname: Evans
authors.forename: N
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Drasdo
authors.forename: I L
authors.initials: IL
authors.lastname: Richards
mesh_terms: D002648:Child; D015350:Contrast Sensitivity / Q000502:physiology; D004410:Dyslexia / Q000209:etiology / Q000503:physiopathology*; D005133:Eye Movements / Q000502:physiology; D005425:Flicker Fusion / Q000502:physiology; D006801:Humans; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual / Q000502:physiology; D011594:Psychometrics; D012030:Refractive Errors / Q000150:complications; D012684:Sensory Thresholds / Q000502:physiology; D014786:Vision Disorders / Q000150:complications / Q000503:physiopathology*; D014792:Visual Acuity