Temporal variability predicts the magnitude of between-group attentional blink differences in developmental dyslexia: a meta-analysis
- Published
- Accepted
- Subject Areas
- Psychiatry and Psychology
- Keywords
- dyslexia, attentional blink, meta-analysis, task-set, temporal orienting, speed of processing
- Copyright
- © 2014 Badcock et al.
- Licence
- This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ PrePrints) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
- Cite this article
- 2014. Temporal variability predicts the magnitude of between-group attentional blink differences in developmental dyslexia: a meta-analysis. PeerJ PrePrints 2:e310v2 https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.310v2
Abstract
Background. Here we report on a meta-analysis of the attentional blink (AB) research focussed on specific reading impairment, commonly referred to as developmental dyslexia. The AB effect relates to a limitation in the allocation of attention over time and examined in a dual-target rapid serial visual presentation paradigm. When the second target appears in close temporal proximity to the first target, the second target is reported less accurately.
Method. A Web of Science search with terms 'dyslexia attentional blink' returned 13 AB experiments (11 papers) conducted with developmental dyslexia (9 were included in this meta-analysis). The main pattern of performance was lower overall accuracy in groups of individuals with dyslexia relative to typically reading peers. That is, a between-group main effect. This meta-analysis examined the size of the between-group effect in relation to physical presentation characteristics, which differed between and within experiments.
Results. Four noteworthy variables were related to the between group effect-size; fixation duration (positive relationship, R2 = .89, p <.01, n = 6), maximum temporal position of T2 (negative relationship, R2 = .46, p <.05, n = 9), the difference between the minimum and maximum temporal position of T2 (negative relationship, R2 = .53, p <.05, n = 9), and the stimulus onset asynchrony (negative relationship, R2 = .46, p <.05, n = 9).
Discussion. These are discussed with respect to the preparation of task-set, temporal orienting, and speed of processing, recommending these as considerations for future research.
Author Comment
V2 of the pre-print has an updated Abstract - broken down by Background/Method/Results/Discussion