Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How Does Arabic Orthographic Connectivity Modulate Brain Activity During Visual Word Recognition: An ERP Study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Brain Topography Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the unique features of the Arabic orthography that differentiates it from many other alphabetical ones is the fact that most letters connect obligatorily to each other. Hence, these letters change their forms according to the location in the word (i.e. beginning, middle, or end), leading to the suggestion that connectivity adds a visual load which negatively impacts reading in Arabic. In this study, we investigated the effects of the orthographic connectivity on the time course of early brain electric responses during the visual word recognition. For this purpose, we collected event-related potentials (ERPs) from adult skilled readers while performing a lexical decision task using fully connected (Cw), partially connected and non-connected words (NCw). Reaction times variance was higher and accuracy was lower in NCw compared to Cw words. ERPs analysis revealed significant amplitude and latency differences between Cw and NCw at posterior electrodes during the N170 component which implied the temporo-occipital areas. Our findings show that instead of slowing down reading, orthographic connectivity in Arabic skilled readers seems to impact positively the reading process already during the early stages of word recognition. These results are discussed in relation to previous observations in the literature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In this word , the first letter is one of the letters that can connect with a preceding one, but does not connect with any following. The second letter is also one of the letters that can connect with a preceding one, but does not connect with any following. Since the first does not connect with any following letter, then the pair remains non-connected. Finally, as for the last letter , we showed in the above (1–3 words) examples that it can connect to preceding and following letters. However, in this particular combination , we know that the letter does not connect with any following, hence the letter remains also non-connected and the word represents a good example of a fully non-connected word.

References

  • Abdelhadi S, Ibrahim R, Eviatar Z (2011) Perceptual load in the reading of Arabic: effects of orthographic visual complexity on detection. Writ Syst Res 3:117–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abu-Rabia S (2001) The role of vowels in reading Semitic scripts: data from Arabic and Hebrew. Read Writ Interdiscipl J 14:39–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Kochva I (2011) Does processing a shallow and a deep orthography produce different brain activity patterns? An ERP study conducted in Hebrew. Dev Neuropsychol 36:933–938

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentin S, Mouchetant-Rostaing Y, Giard MH, Echallier JF, Pernier J (1999) ERP manifestations of processing printed words at different psycholinguistic levels: time course and scalp distribution. J Cogn Neurosci 11:235–260

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen L, Dehaene, S, Naccache, L, Lehericy, S, Dehaene-Lambertz, G, Henaff, MA, Michel, F (2000) The visual word form area: spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal subjects and posterior split-brain patients. Brain 123:291–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Coltheart M (2005) Modelling reading: the dual-route approach. In: Snowling MJ, Hulme C (eds) The science of reading. Blackwell, Oxford

  • Compton PE, Grossbacher P, Posner MI, Tucker DM (1991) A cognitive–anatomical approach to attention in lexical access. J Cognit Neurosci 3:304–312

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelissen P, Tarkiainen A, Helenius P, Salmelin R (2003) Cortical effects of shifting letter position in letter strings of varying length. J Cogn Neurosci 15:731–746

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davis CJ, Lupker SJ (2006) Masked inhibitory priming in english: evidence for lexical inhibition. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32:668–687

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Peralta G, Menedez R, Gonzalez Andino S, Lantz G, Michel CM, Landis T (2001) Noninvasive localization of electromagnetic epileptic activity. I. Method descriptions and simulations. Brain Topogr 14:131–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene S, Cohen L, Sigman M, Vinckier F (2005) The neural code for written words: a proposal. Trends Cogn Sci 9:335–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Déjerine J (1892) Contribution à l’étude anatomo-pathologique et clinique des différentes variétés de cécité verbale. Mémoires de la Société de Biologie 4:61–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri LC (2000) Learning to read and learning to spell: two sides of a coin. Topics Lang Disorders 20:19–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri CL, Snowling JM (2005) Developmental variations in word recognition In Stone CA, Silliman RE, Ehren JB, Apel K (eds) Handbook of language and literacy: development and disorders. Guilford Press, New York, pp 433–460

  • Ellis AW (1993) Reading, writing and dyslexia: a cognitive analysis. Erlbaum, Hove

  • Forster KI, Chambers SM (1973) Lexical access and naming time. J Verbal Learning Verbal Behav 12:627–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frith U (1985) Beneath the surface of developmental dyslexia. In: Patterson KE, Marashall JC, Coltheart M (eds) Surface dyslexia. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London, pp 301–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Gratton G, Coles MG, Donchin E (1983) A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 55:468–484

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Green DM, Swets JA (1966) Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossi G, Coch D, Coffey-Corina S, Holcomb PJ, Neville HJ (2001) Phonological processing in visual rhyming: a developmental erp study. J Cogn Neurosci 13:610–625

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Helenius P, Tarkiainen A, Cornelissen P, Hansen PC, Salmelin R (1999) Dissociation of normal feature analysis and deficient processing of letter-strings in dyslexic adults. Cereb Cortex 9:476–483

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Horie S, Yamasaki T, Okamoto T, Nakashima T, Ogata K, Tobimatsu S (2011) Differential roles of spatial frequency on reading processes for ideograms and phonograms: a high-density ERP study. Neuroscience 72:68–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim R, Eviatar Z, Aharon-Peretz J (2002) The characteristics of Arabic orthography slow its processing. Neuropsychology 16:322–326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kronbichler M, Wimmer H, Staffen W, Hutzler F, Mair A, Ladurner G (2008) Developmental dyslexia: gray matter abnormalities in the occipitotemporal cortex. Hum Brain Mapp 29:613–625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann D, Skrandies W (1980) Reference-free identification of components of chekerboard-evoked multichannels potential fields. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 48:609–621

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Macmillan NA, Creelman CD (1991) Detection theory: a user’s guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin CD, Nazir T, Thierry G, Paulignan Y, Demonet JF (2006) Perceptual and lexical effects in letter identification: an event-related potential study of the word superiority effect. Brain Res 1098:153–160

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maurer U, Brandeis D, McCandliss BD (2005a) Fast, visual specialization for reading in English revealed by the topography of the N170 ERP response. Behav Brain Funct 1:13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maurer U, Brem S, Bucher K, Brandeis D (2005b) Emerging neurophysiological specialization for letter strings. J Cogn Neurosci 17:1532–1552

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maurer U, Brem S, Bucher K, Kranz F, Benz R, Steinhausen HC, Brandeis D (2007) Impaired tuning of a fast occipito-temporal response for print in dyslexic children learning to read. Brain 130:3200–3210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCandliss BD, Cohen L, Dehaene S (2003) The visual word form area: expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus. Trends Cogn Sci 7:293–299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland JL, Rumelhart DE (1981) An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part I: an account of basic findings. Psychol Rev 88:375–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nobre AC, Allison T, McCarthy G (1994) Word recognition in the human inferior temporal lobe. Nature 372:260–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Pammer K, Hansen PC, Kringelbach ML, Holliday I, Barnes G, Hillebrand A, Singh KD, Cornelissen PL (2004) Visual word recognition: the first half second. Neuroimage 22:1819–1825

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Partington JE, Leiter RG (1949) Partington’s pathway test. Psychol Serv Center Bull 1:9–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulesu E, Demonet JF, Fazio F, McCrory E, Chanoine V, Brunswick N, Cappa SF, Cossu G, Habib M, Frith CD, Frith U (2001) Dyslexia: cultural diversity and biological unity. Science 291:2165–2167

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Proverbio AM, Adorni R (2008) Orthographic familiarity, phonological legality and number of orthographic neighbours affect the onset of ERP lexical effects. Behav Brain Funct 4:27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Proverbio AM, Zani A, Adorni R (2008) The left fusiform area is affected by written frequency of words. Neuropsychologia 46:2292–2299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roman G, Pavard B (1987). A comparative study: How we read Arabic and French. In: O’Regan JK, Levy-Schoen A (eds) Eye movement: from physiology to cognition. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 431–440

  • Rumelhart DE, McClelland JL (1982) An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychol Rev 89:60–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Salmelin R, Service, E, Kiesila, P, Uutela, K, Salonen O (1996) Impaired visual word processing in dyslexia revealed with magnetoencephalography. Ann Neurol 40:157–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Sereno SC, Rayner K, Sereno SC, Brewer CC, O’Donnell PJ (2003) Measuring word recognition in reading: eye movements and event-related potentials. Trends Cogn Sci 7:489–493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simon G, Bernard C, Largy P, Lalonde R, Rebai M (2004) Chronometry of visual word recognition during passive and lexical decision tasks: an ERP investigation. Int J Neurosci 114:1401–1432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simon G, Bernard C, Lalonde R, Rebai M (2006) Orthographic transparency and grapheme-phoneme conversion: an ERP study in Arabic and French readers. Brain Res 1104:141–152

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Simon G, Petit L, Bernard C, Rebai M (2007) N170 ERPs could represent a logographic processing strategy in visual word recognition. Behav Brain Funct 3:21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steffler JD (2001) Implicit cognition and spelling development. Dev Rev 21:168–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talairach J, Tournoux P (1988) Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain. Thieme, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarkiainen A, Helenius P, Hansen PC, Cornelissen PL, Salmelin R (1999) Dynamics of letter string perception in the human occipitotemporal cortex. Brain 122:2119–2132

    Google Scholar 

  • Treiman R, Bourassa DC (2000) The development of spelling skills. Topics Lang Disord 20:1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warrington EK, Shallice T (1980) Word-form dyslexia. Brain 103:99–112

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a post-doctoral fellowship to H. T from the Edmond J. Safra Brain Research Center, and partly by the Israeli National Science Foundation (Grant no’ 623/11). We thank Drs Rolando Grave de Peralta Menedez and Sara Gonzales Andino for providing the LAURA inverse solution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Edmond J. Safra Brain Research Center for the Study of Learning Disabilities, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, 31905, Haifa, Israel

    Haitham Taha, Raphiq Ibrahim & Asaid Khateb

  2. Department of Learning Disabilities, Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, 31905, Haifa, Israel

    Haitham Taha, Raphiq Ibrahim & Asaid Khateb

Authors
  1. Haitham Taha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Raphiq Ibrahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Asaid Khateb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asaid Khateb.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 55 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Taha, H., Ibrahim, R. & Khateb, A. How Does Arabic Orthographic Connectivity Modulate Brain Activity During Visual Word Recognition: An ERP Study. Brain Topogr 26, 292–302 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-012-0241-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-012-0241-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation