Nine-year-old Peter is one of the brightest children in his 3rd-grade class. He has an amazing vocabulary and knows everything there is to know about soccer. But when it comes to reading about soccer, he has a lot of trouble.
It takes Peter a long time to read each word, and even longer to read whole sentences. He often has to guess at how you say a word — and sometimes his guess is wrong. Reading out loud is especially stressful and embarrassing. His teacher recently told Peter’s parents she thinks he might have dyslexia.
The term dyslexia was coined from the Greek words dys, meaning ill or difficult, and lexis, meaning word. It is used to refer to persons for whom reading is simply beyond their reach. Spelling and writing, due to their close relationship with reading, are usually included.
There is a labyrinth of differing, opposing, and often contradictory theories about dyslexia; what it is, its causes, and its possible correction. The cerebellum, a brain structure traditionally considered to be involved in motor function, has been implicated in developmental dyslexia. New research, however, shows that the cerebellum is not engaged during reading in typical readers and does not differ in children who have dyslexia (Ashburn et al., 2019).
The visual magnocellular deficit theory suggests that the difficulties in the visual processing of dyslexia are caused by the dysfunction of the magnocellular system (Stein, 2018). Miller (2015) says the biggest cause of reading difficulty is the unsystematic and unscientific teaching of reading. As a result, children are let down twice by the educational system: first by not being properly taught and then pathologized with the “diagnosis” of dyslexia when they fail.
We discuss the most common proposed causes of dyslexia in more detail.
Table of contents:
- Dyslexia cause no. 1: Genetic influences
- Dyslexia cause no. 2: Cognitive deficits
- Dyslexia cause no. 3: Brain differences
- Tutoring for children with dyslexia
Dyslexia cause no. 1: Genetic influences
There is a large body of research on children at risk due to family history of dyslexia, including seven longitudinal studies covering age ranges from preschool/kindergarten through 2nd, 4th, or 6th grade. The estimated prevalence rate for dyslexia in the general English-speaking population is between 5 and 17%. However, the rate of reading-related skill deficits (e.g., word reading, orthographic coding, phonological decoding and phoneme awareness) based on familial risk studies is between 35 and 40% (Molfese et al., 2008).
The relative contributions of genetic influences and shared family environment can be dissected in twin studies. It has been shown robustly that a diagnosis of dyslexia is significantly higher in identical twins, who have a virtually identical genetic makeup, than it is in non-identical twins who (like ordinary siblings) share about half of their genetic makeup. A large-scale study of twins with dyslexia yielded a concordance rate of 68% in identical twins, as compared with 38% in non-identical twins, indicating a substantial genetic component (DeFries & Alarcón, 1996).
Dyslexia cause no. 2: Cognitive deficits
Although some causes of dyslexia have a genetic origin, and environmental factors play an important role, cognition mediates brain-behavior relationships and therefore offers a sufficient level of explanation for the development of principled interventions. We thus need to understand the cognitive difficulties that underpin reading failure, regardless of whether their origin is constitutional or environmental (Elliott & Grigorenko, 2014).
Dyslexia research has been dominated by the quest for a single cognitive deficit that is necessary and sufficient to cause all behavioral characteristics of the disorder. Until the 1950s, the belief was that dyslexia is attributable to visual processing problems, perhaps also including motor skill problems. Visual processing refers to the brain’s ability to make sense of what the eyes see; visual memory is often considered to be a subset of visual processing rather than a separate skill.
But in 1957 Noam Chomsky published his seminal book, Syntactic Structures, which transformed the study of language and with it, reading. Dyslexia became a linguistic, phonological problem, and any role for visual processing was abandoned. In an inﬂuential book, Dyslexia: Theory and Research, Vellutino (1979) argued that many of the apparent visual problems could actually be attributed to language difﬁculties — especially to deficient phonological awareness.
Phonological deficit theory
The phonological deficit theory became the most well-developed and supported of the theories of dyslexia. The U.S. researchers have united in adopting the phonological deficit hypothesis since the early 1980s, and this united front has led to the investment of more than $15 million annually by the US government, via the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (Fawcett, 2001). This research program into the causes and remediation of reading disabilities continues until the present day.
Phonological awareness (PA) refers to an individual’s awareness of the phonological structure, or sound structure, of language. It is a listening skill that includes the ability to distinguish units of speech, such as rhymes, syllables in words, and individual phonemes in syllables. Phonemic awareness is a subset of PA that focuses on recognizing and manipulating phonemes, the smallest units of sound. The two most important phonemic awareness skills are segmenting and blending.
The ability to segment and blend phonemes is said to be critical for the development of reading skills, including decoding and fluency, and even that it predicts reading ability (Edwards & Taub, 2016). It is also claimed that PA training can prevent and correct reading difficulties (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 13). Moustafa, however, points out that correlation does not establish causation. “In statistics, the word predicts means nothing more than that there is a high correlation between two phenomena” (Moustafa, 2001, p. 248).
Not all studies support phonological and phonemic awareness training (Pape-Neumann et al., 2015; Krashen, 1999a; Krashen 1999b). Blomert and Willems (2010) investigated children at familial risk for dyslexia in kindergarten and first grade. The familial risk was genuine; 40% developed reading deficits in first grade. However, they did not find any relationship between a PA or other phonological processing deficits in kindergarten and reading deficits in first grade.
Some findings indicate that phonemic awareness may develop as a consequence of exposure to reading and writing, while other support an intermediate view, “that phonological awareness and alphabetic literacy learning influence each other reciprocally” (Manolitsis & Tafa, 2011, p. 31). Some researchers claim that phonological factors may be less important than is commonly accepted. Not all children with reading disabilities demonstrate a phonological deﬁcit, and Catts and Adlof (2011) point out that children with poor phonological abilities can nevertheless develop good reading skills. Also, a single cognitive deficit model cannot account for comorbidity. Dyslexia co-occurs more often than would be expected by chance with other developmental disorders, such as ADHD and specific language impairment.
Multiple cognitive deficits
Given that a single phonological deﬁcit is not necessary or sufﬁcient to cause dyslexia, current thinking sees this as one of multiple cognitive deﬁcits that are likely to interact to cause dyslexia (Pennington, 2006; Peterson & Pennington, 2012).
In addition to phonological awareness, cognitive psychology has now linked many brain-based skills to dyslexia:
- verbal fluency;
- attention and executive functions;
- visual attention;
- visuospatial abilities;
- processing speed;
- short-term memory;
- auditory working memory;
- visual and visual sequential memory;
- visual long-term memory, especially for details;
- verbal long-term memory; and
- rapid naming.
Dyslexia linked to verbal and nonverbal IQ
Researchers have also found a link between dyslexia and verbal and nonverbal IQ. Van Bergen et al. (2014) assessed four-year-olds (N = 212) with and without familial risk for dyslexia on ten IQ subtests. Reading and arithmetic skills were measured four years later, at the end of Grade 2. Relative to the controls, the at-risk group without dyslexia had subtle impairments only in the verbal domain, while the at-risk group with dyslexia lagged across IQ tasks. Nonverbal IQ was associated with both reading and arithmetic, whereas verbal IQ was uniquely related to later reading. The children who went on to develop dyslexia performed relatively poorly in both verbal and nonverbal abilities at age four, which lends credence to the multiple cognitive deficit model.
Why cognitive skills matter
Weak cognitive skills prevent a process called orthographic mapping. Every word has three forms: its sounds, spelling, and meaning. The process of orthographic mapping involves the brain linking the three forms of the word and storing them together in long-term memory. Orthographic mapping allows for instant word recognition, fluent reading, and accurate spelling.
Dyslexia cause no. 3: Brain differences
There is old but popular evidence consistent with the idea that there is something different in the brain of some persons who have persistent unexpected difficulty in learning to read. Specifically, Galaburda and colleagues (1985) reported several anatomical anomalies in the brains of a few persons with dyslexia. Although those findings are intriguing, they are far from decisive. The samples were extremely small (a total of four men and three women) and included participants with evidence for neurological or psychiatric conditions and participants with impairments not limited to written language, who should have been excluded from a study purporting to examine brain correlates of dyslexia. The control group was also very small, effectively precluding reliable estimation of the specificity of any findings.
Visual word form area
As technology advanced, neuroscience contributed more and more to dyslexia research. Unfortunately, most studies have too small samples to permit reliable conclusions to be drawn, and many results are inconsistent (Protopapas & Parrila, 2018). In a meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies of dyslexia, Martin et al. (2016) list studies in which differences between groups with and without dyslexia were found in specific brain regions. The most consistent findings concerned the left occipitotemporal cortex, which includes the so-called visual word form area (VWFA), though to be critical for reading.
Neuroscientists at Georgetown University Medical Center concluded that skilled readers can recognize words at a lightning-fast speed when they read because the words have been placed in a sort of visual dictionary. This part of the brain, the VWFA (shown in yellow), functions separately from an area that processes the sounds of written words (Glezer et al., 2016).
In the largest study of its kind up to date, Brem et al. (2020) confirmed that the VWFA is key to fluent reading.
Left parietal lobe
The left inferior parietal lobule came in a close second in the meta-analysis study by Martin and colleagues (shown in red). This part of the brain is said to be involved in word analysis, grapheme-to-phoneme conversion, and general phonological and semantic processing.
Imaging also reveals compensatory overactivation in other parts of the reading system (shown in green). The compensatory neural systems allow a dyslexic person to read more accurately. However, the critical visual word-form area remains disrupted and difficulties with rapid, fluent, automatic reading persist. The dyslexic continues to read slowly.
Brain differences do not equal brain disorders
Protopapas and Parrila (2018) point out that brain differences do not equal brain disorders, and that anatomical differences may be a consequence of reading experience as opposed to a cause of dyslexia (Krafnick et al., 2014).
It should also be noted that the brain is plastic. New connections can form and the internal structure of the existing synapses can change. New neurons, also called nerve cells, are constantly being born, particularly in the learning and memory centers. Approximately 700 new neurons are daily being formed in the brain. Neurons die each day too, keeping the overall number more or less balanced, with a slow loss of cells as we age. A person who becomes an expert in a specific domain will have growth in the areas of the brain that are involved with their particular skill.
The human brain is a powerhouse; the human brain has put a man on the moon, created the silicon chip that can do billions of calculations per second, invented red, yellow, and green lights to control millions of people in traffic every day and — believe it or not — found ways to see what goes on inside itself. The human brain itself tells us that it is most certainly capable of overcoming learning obstacles like dyslexia, despite genetic influences and brain differences.
Tutoring for children with dyslexia
Edublox specializes in educational interventions that make children smarter, help them learn and read faster, and do math with ease. Our programs enable learners to overcome reading difficulties and other learning obstacles, assisting them to become life-long learners and empowering them to realize their highest educational goals.
Watch our playlist of customer reviews and experience how Edublox training and tutoring help overcome dyslexia signs and symptoms. Learn more about our approach to dyslexia treatment and book a free consultation to discuss your child’s learning needs. We cater for a variety of dyslexia types.
Dyslexia causes – key takeaways
Authored by Susan du Plessis (B.A. Hons Psychology; B.D.), an educational specialist with 30+ years’ experience in the field of learning disabilities.
Medically reviewed by Dr. Zelda Strydom (MBChB).
References and sources:
Ashburn, S. M., Ashburn, S. M., Flowers, D. L., Napoliello, E. M., & Eden, G. F. (2019). Cerebellar function in children with and without dyslexia during single word processing. Human Brain Mapping.
Binamé, F., Danzio, S., & Poncelet, M. (2015). Relative ease in creating detailed orthographic representations contrasted with severe difficulties to maintain them in long-term memory among dyslexic children. Dyslexia, 21(4), 361-370.
Brem, S., Maurer, U., Kronbichler, M. et al. (2020). Visual word form processing deficits driven by severity of reading impairments in children with developmental dyslexia. Scientific Reports, 10.
Brizzolara, D., Chilosi, A., Cipriani, P., Di Filippo, G., Gasperini, F., Mazzotti, S., … Zoccolotti, P. (2006). Do phonologic and rapid automatized naming deficits differentially affect dyslexic children with and without a history of language delay? A study of Italian dyslexic children. Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, 19(3), 141-149.
Blomert, L., & Willems, D. (2010). Is there a causal link from a phonological awareness deficit to reading failure in children at familial risk for dyslexia? Dyslexia, 16(4), 300-317.
Byrne, B. (2011). Evaluating the role of phonological factors in early literacy development: Insights from experimental and behavior-genetic studies. In S. A. Brady, D. Braze, & C. A. Fowler (Eds.), Explaining individual differences in reading: Theory and evidence (pp. 175-195). New York: Psychology Press.
Catts, H. W., & Adlof, S. (2011). Phonological and other language deﬁcits associated with dyslexia. In S. A. Brady, D. Braze & C. A. Fowler (Eds.), Explaining individual differences in reading: Theory and evidence (pp. 137-151). New York: Psychology Press.
Cowan, N., Hogan, T. P., Alt, M., Green, S., Cabbage, K. L., Brinkley, S., & Gray, S. (2017). Short‐term memory in childhood dyslexia: Deﬁcient serial order in multiple modalities. Dyslexia, 23, 209-233.
Dale, P. S., Crain-Thoreson, C., & Robinson, N. M. (1995). Linguistic precocity and the development of reading. Applied Psycholinguistics, 16(2), 173-187.
De Jong, P. F., & van der Leij, A. (2003). Developmental changes in the manifestation of a phonological deficit in dyslexic children learning to read a regular orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 22-40.
DeFries, J. C., & Alarcón, M. (1996). Genetics of specific reading disability. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 2, 39–47.
Denckla, M. B., & Rudel, R. G. (1976). Rapid ‘automatized’ naming (R.A.N.). Dyslexia differentiated from other learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 14, 471-479.
Edwards, O. W., & Taub, G. E. (2016). The influence of specific phonemic awareness processes on the reading comprehension of African American students. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30(1), 74-84.
Elliott, J. G. (2015). The dyslexia debate: Actions, reactions, and over-reactions. Psychology of Education Review, 39(1), 6-16.
Elliott, J. G., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2014). The dyslexia debate. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fawcett, A. (2001). Dyslexia at school: a review of research for the DfES. Unpublished review for the Department for Education and Skills, the British Dyslexia Association and the Dyslexia Institute.
Fawcett, A. (2014). Preface. In A. Fawcett, & R. Nicolson (Eds.), Dyslexia in children: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. xiii-xx). London: Routledge.
Fisher, S. E., & DeFries, J. C. (2002). Developmental dyslexia: genetic dissection of a complex cognitive trait. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3(10), 767–780.
Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails. Psychological Bulletin, 123(1), 71-99.
Galaburda A. M., Sherman G. F., Rosen G. D., Aboitiz F., & Geschwind N. (1985). Developmental dyslexia: Four consecutive patients with cortical anomalies. Annals of Neurology, 18, 222–233.
Giovagnoli, G., Vicari, S., Tomassetti, S., & Menghini, D. (2016). The role of visual-spatial abilities in dyslexia: Age differences in children’s reading? Frontiers in Psychology.
Glezer, L. S., Eden, G, Jiang, X., Luetje, M., Napoliello, E., Kim, J., & Riesenhuber, M. (2016). Uncovering phonological and orthographic selectivity across the reading network using fMRI-RA. Neuroimage, 138, 248-256.
Guthrie, J. T., & Goldberg, H. K. (1972). Visual sequential memory in reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 5(1), 45-50.
Helland, T., & AsbjØrnsen, A. (2003). Visual-sequential and visuo-spatial skills in dyslexia: Variations according to language comprehension and mathematics skills. Child Neuropsychology 9(3), 208-220.
Helland, T., & Morken, F. (2015). Neurocognitive development and predictors of l1 and l2 literacy skills in dyslexia: A longitudinal study of children 5-11 years old. Dyslexia, 22(1), 3-26.
Huestegge, L., Rohrßen, J., van Ermingen-Marbach, M., Pape-Neumann, J., & Heim, S. (2014). Devil in the details? Developmental dyslexia and visual long-term memory for details. Frontiers in Psychology.
Kere, J. (2014). The molecular genetics and neurobiology of developmental dyslexia as model of a complex phenotype. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 452(2), 236-243.
Kilpatrick, D. A. (2016). Equipped for reading success. Syracuse: Casey & Kirsch Publishers.
Krafnick, A. J., Flowers, D. L., Luetje, M. M., Napoliello, E. M., & Eden, G. F. (2014). An investigation into the origin of anatomical differences in dyslexia. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(3), 901-908.
Krashen, S. (1999a). Effects of phonemic awareness training on delayed tests of reading. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89, 79-82.
Krashen, S. (1999b). Training in phonemic awareness. Greater on tests of phonemic awareness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89, 412-416.
Landerl, K., Freudenthaler, H. H., Heene, M., de Jong, P. F., Desrochers, A., Manolitsis, G., … Georgiou, G. K. (2018). Phonological awareness and rapid automatized naming as longitudinal predictors of reading in five alphabetic orthographies with varying degrees of consistency. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1-15.
Majerus, S., & Cowan, N. (2016). The nature of verbal short-term impairment in dyslexia: The importance of serial order. Frontiers in Psychology.
Manolitsis, G., & Tafa, E. (2011). Letter-name letter-sound and phonological awareness: Evidence from Greek-speaking kindergarten children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 24(1), 27-53.
Martin, A., Kronbichler, M., & Richlan, F. (2016). Dyslexic brain activation abnormalities in deep and shallow orthographies: A meta-analysis of 28 functional neuroimaging studies. Human Brain Mapping, 37, 2676–2699.
Menghini, D., Finzi, A., Benassi, M., Bolzani, R., Facoetti, A., Giovagnoli, S., … Vicari, S. (2010). Different underlying neurocognitive deficits in developmental dyslexia: A comparative study. Neuropsychologia, 48(4), 863-872.
Miller, J. F. (2015). Do you read me? Learning difficulties, dyslexia, and the denial of meaning. London: Karnac Books.
Molfese, D. L., Molfese, V. J., Barnes, M. E., Warren, C. G., & Molfese, P. J. (2008). Familial predictors of dyslexia: Evidence from preschool children with and without familial dyslexia risk. In G. Reid, A. J. Fawcett, F. Manis, & L. Siegel (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of dyslexia (pp. 99-120). London: Sage.
Moura, O., Simões, M. R., & Pereira, M. (2015). Executive functioning in children with developmental dyslexia. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 28(S1), 20-41.
Moustafa, M. (2001). Contemporary reading instruction. In T. Loveless (Ed.). The great curriculum debate: How should we teach reading and math? (pp. 247-267). Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Nicolson, R. I., & Fawcett, A. J. (2008). Dyslexia, learning, and the brain. London: The MIT Press.
Pape-Neumann, J., van Ermingen-Marbach, M., Grande, M., Willmes, K., & Heim, S. (2015). The role of phonological awareness in treatments of dyslexic primary school children. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 75, 80-106.
Pennington, B. F. (2006). From single to multiple deficit models of developmental disorders. Cognition, 101(2), 385-413.
Pennington, B. F., & Olson, R. K. (2005). Genetics of dyslexia. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.). Blackwell handbooks of developmental psychology. The science of reading: A handbook (p. 453–472). Blackwell Publishing.
Pennington, B. F., Santerre-Lemmon, L., Rosenberg, J., MacDonald, B., Boada, R., Friend, A., … Olson, R. K. (2012). Individual prediction of dyslexia by single versus multiple deficit models. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121(1), 212-224.
Peterson, R. L., & Pennington, B. F. (2012). Developmental dyslexia. The Lancet, 379, 1997–2007.
Protopapas, A., & Parrila, R. (2018). Is dyslexia a brain disorder? Brain Sciences, 8(4).
Shaywitz, S. (2005). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete science-based program for reading problems at any level. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
Snowling, M. J., Goulandris, N., & Defty, N. (1996). A longitudinal study of reading development in dyslexic children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 653-669.
Spalding K. L., Bergmann O., Alkass K., Bernard S., Salehpour M., Huttner H.B., … Frisén J. (2013). Dynamics of hippocampal neurogenesis in adult humans. Cell, 153(6), 1219-1227.
Stein, J. (2018). The magnocellular theory of developmental dyslexia. In T. Lachmann, & T. Weis (Eds.). Reading and dyslexia (pp. 97-128). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Stoodley, C. J., & Stein, J. F. (2006). A processing speed deficit in dyslexic adults? Evidence from a peg-moving task. Neuroscience Letters, 399(3), 264-267.
Talepasand, S., Eskandaripour, M., & Taghinezhad, A. (2018). Comparison of working and visual memory in children with and without dyslexia. Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 20(9).
Valdois, S., Bosse, M.-L., & Tainturier, M.-J. (2004). The cognitive deficits responsible for developmental dyslexia: Review of evidence for a visual attentional deficit hypothesis. Dyslexia, 10(4), 339-363.
Vellutino, F. R. (1979). Dyslexia: Theory and research. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vender, M. (2017). Disentangling dyslexia. Bern: Peter Lang AG.Weiss, A. H, Granot, R. Y., & Ahissar, M. (2014). The enigma of dyslexic musicians. Neuropsychologia, 54, 28-40.
Weiss, A. H, Granot, R. Y., & Ahissar, M. (2014). The enigma of dyslexic musicians. Neuropsychologia, 54, 28-40.
Wolf, M., & Bowers, P. G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 415-438.