↓ Skip to main content

Functional neuroanatomy of developmental dyslexia: the role of orthographic depth

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
172 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Functional neuroanatomy of developmental dyslexia: the role of orthographic depth
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00347
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabio Richlan

Abstract

Orthographic depth (OD) (i.e., the complexity, consistency, or transparency of grapheme-phoneme correspondences in written alphabetic language) plays an important role in the acquisition of reading skills. Correspondingly, developmental dyslexia is characterized by different behavioral manifestations across languages varying in OD. This review focuses on the question of whether these different behavioral manifestations are associated with different functional neuroanatomical manifestations. It provides a review and critique of cross-linguistic brain imaging studies of developmental dyslexia. In addition, it includes an analysis of state-of-the-art functional neuroanatomical models of developmental dyslexia together with orthography-specific predictions derived from these models. These predictions should be tested in future brain imaging studies of typical and atypical reading in order to refine the current neurobiological understanding of developmental dyslexia, especially with respect to orthography-specific and universal aspects.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 165 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 19%
Student > Master 22 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 11%
Researcher 18 10%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Other 34 20%
Unknown 32 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 48 28%
Neuroscience 16 9%
Linguistics 15 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 6%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 45 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2024.
All research outputs
#7,249,680
of 26,434,713 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,685
of 7,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,453
of 239,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#118
of 241 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,434,713 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,871 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 239,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 241 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.