Task-level executive function differences in dyslexia on the Phoneme Go No-Go and Picture 2-back tasks are no longer significant after controlling for processing speed¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 2 associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Group differences in Phoneme Go No-Go commission errors and Picture 2-back errors were no longer significant after controlling for processing speed. → Doyle C 2018 q3 i? Group differences in Picture 2-back errors were no longer significant after controlling for processing speed. → Doyle C 2018 (2)

Evidence¶

Doyle C 2018¶

Doyle C, Smeaton AF, Roche RAP and Boran L (2018) Inhibition and Updating, but Not Switching, Predict Developmental Dyslexia and Individual Variation in Reading Ability. Front. Psychol. 9:795. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00795

q3 · i? · associational · r2

ANCOVA controlling for processing speed in the dyslexia vs control sample. Phoneme Go No-Go commission error differences were "no longer significant after controlling for individual variation in processing speed," F(1, 53) = 2.59, p = 0.114.

"Group differences in commission errors on the Phoneme Go No-Go [F(1, 53) = 2.59, p = 0.114] task are no longer significant after controlling for individual variation in processing speed."

Doyle C 2018 (2)¶

Doyle C, Smeaton AF, Roche RAP and Boran L (2018) Inhibition and Updating, but Not Switching, Predict Developmental Dyslexia and Individual Variation in Reading Ability. Front. Psychol. 9:795. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00795

q3 · i? · associational · r2

ANCOVA controlling for processing speed in the same sample. Picture 2-back error differences were "no longer significant," F(1, 53) = 3.88, p = 0.054; equivalence was not tested.

"Group differences in errors on the Picture 2-back task are no longer significant [ F(1, 53) = 3.88, p = 0.054) after controlling for individual variation in processing speed."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Children with developmental dyslexia show a significant updating impairment at the error z-mean composite level, which remains after controlling for processing speed
• An apparent switching advantage in dyslexia (lower switching reaction-time cost) disappears after controlling for processing speed
• Children with developmental dyslexia show a significant inhibition impairment at the error z-mean composite level, which remains after controlling for processing speed — reports the opposite
• Omission and commission errors in n-back tasks have different correlates and may represent different processes — related
• Children with developmental dyslexia show a processing speed impairment relative to controls — related