Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Differences between good and poor child writers on fMRI contrasts for writing newly taught and highly practiced letter forms

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

During fMRI imaging, 12 good and 8 poor writers aged 11 wrote a newly taught pseudoletter and a highly practiced letter. Both letters were formed from the same components, but the pseudoletter had a novel configuration not corresponding to a written English letter form. On the first fMRI contrast between the newly taught pseudoletter and highly practiced letter, based on a group map, good and poor writers significantly activated many common regions; but the poor writers showed spatially more extensive brain activation than did the good writers. The additional regions of significant activation may reflect inefficiency in learning a new letter form. For the second contrast between the highly practiced and newly taught letters, individual brain activation analyses, based on exact clusters, showed that good and poor writers differed significantly in activation only in left fusiform. This individual fusiform activation correlated significantly with behavioral measures of automatic letter writing and expressive orthographic coding. Multiple regression in which both individual fusiform activation and individual orthographic coding were entered explained significant variance in written composition. Results are discussed in reference to the role of the orthographic loop, from internal letter form to external letter writing by hand, in writing letters and composing. The overall results are consistent with prior brain and behavioral studies of writing.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, R., & Berninger, V. (1993). Structural equation modeling of relationships among developmental skills and writing skills in primary and intermediate grade writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 478–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alamargot, D., & Chanquoy, L. (2001). Through the models of writing. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alamargot, D., Chesnet, D., Dansac, C., & Ros, C. (2006). Eye and pen: A new device for studying reading during writing. Behavior Research Methods, 38(2), 287–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basso, A., Taborelli, A., & Vignolo, L. (1978). Dissociated disorders of speaking and writing in aphasia. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 41, 556–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckmann, C., Jenkinson, M., & Smith, S. (2003). General multi-level linear modelling for group analysis in FMRI. Neuroimage, 20, 1052–1063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckmann, C., & Smith, S. (2004). Probabilistic independent component analysis for functional magnetic resonance imaging. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 23, 137–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. (1987). Global, component, and serial processing of printed words in beginning readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 43, 387–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. (2001). Process assessment of the learner (PAL) test battery for reading and writing. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. (2007). Process assessment of the learner, 2nd edition. Diagnostic for reading and writing (PAL-II RW). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation/Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Abbott, R., Augsburger, A., & Garcia, N. (2009a). Comparison of pen and keyboard transcription modes in children with and without learning disabilities affecting transcription. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 123–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Abbott, R., Rogan, L., Reed, E., Abbott, S., Brooks, A., et al. (1998). Teaching spelling to children with specific learning disabilities: The mind’s ear and eye beat the computer or pencil. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21, 106–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Abbott, R., Whitaker, D., Sylvester, L., & Nolen, S. (1995). Integrating low-level skills and high-level skills in treatment protocols for writing disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 293–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Cartwright, A., Yates, C., Swanson, H. L., & Abbott, R. (1994). Developmental skills related to writing and reading acquisition in the intermediate grades: Shared and unique variance. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 6, 161–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Dunn, A., Lin, S., & Shimada, S. (2004). School evolution: Scientist-practitioner educators creating optimal learning environments for ALL students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 500–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., & Fayol, M. (2008). Why spelling is important and how to teach it effectively. http://www.literacyencyclopedia.ca/On-Line Encyclopedia of Language and Literacy Development. National Centres for Excellence Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network (CLLRNet). (Published online: 2008-01-22 14:57:52).

  • Berninger, V., & Fuller, F. (1992). Gender differences in orthographic, verbal, and compositional fluency: Implications for diagnosis of writing disabilities in primary grade children. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 363–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Raskind, W., Richards, T., Abbott, R., & Stock, P. (2008). A multidisciplinary approach to understanding developmental dyslexia within working-memory architecture: Genotypes, phenotypes, brain, and instruction. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33, 707–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., & Richards, T. (2002). Brain literacy for educators and psychologists. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., & Richards, T. (2009). Brain and learning. In E. Anderman & L. Anderman (Eds.), Psychology of classroom learning: An encyclopedia (Vol. 1, pp. 15–22). Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Richards, T., & Abbott, R. (2009b). The role of the hand in written idea expression. Proceedings for Writing in all its states. In D. Alamargot, J. Bouchand, E. Lambert, V. Millogo, & C. Beaudet (Eds.), Proceedings of the international conference « de la France au Québec: l'Ecriture dans tous ses états », University of Poitiers, France, 12–15 November 2008. http://www.poitou-charentes.iufm.fr/spip.php?article1048.

  • Berninger, V., Richards, T., Stock, P., Abbott, R., Trivedi, P., Altemeier, L., et al. (2009c). fMRI activation related to nature of ideas generated and differences between good and poor writers during idea generation. British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series II, 6, 77–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., & Rutberg, J. (1992). Relationship of finger function to beginning writing: Application to diagnosis of writing disabilities. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 34, 198–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Rutberg, J., Abbott, R., Garcia, N., Anderson-Youngstrom, M., Brooks, A., et al. (2006). Tier 1 and Tier 2 early intervention for handwriting and composing. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R., Abbott, S., Brooks, A., Rogan, L., et al. (1997). Treatment of handwriting fluency problems in beginning writing: Transfer from handwriting to composition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 652–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Yates, C., Cartwright, A., Rutberg, J., Remy, E., & Abbott, R. (1992). Lower-level developmental skills in beginning writing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 257–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V., Yates, C., & Lester, K. (1991). Multiple orthographic codes in acquisition of reading and writing skills. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 3, 115–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brain, L. (1967). Speech disorders: Aphasia, apraxia, and agnosia. London: Butterworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. (2004). Specialization within the ventral stream: The case for the visual word form area. Neuroimage, 22, 466–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Lehéricy, S., Chhochon, F., Lemer, C., Rivaud, S., & Dehaene, S. (2002). Language-specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the visual word form area. Brain, 125, 1054–1069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, V., Campbell, S., MacLean, M., & Barnes, J. (2006). Contribution of lower-order skills to the written composition of college students with and without dyslexia. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 175–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehane, S., Le Clec’H, G., Poline, J.-B., Bihan, D., & Cohen, L. (2002). The visual word form area: A prelexical representation of visual words in the fusiform gyrus. Brain Imaging, 13, 321–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demie, F. (2001). Ethnic and gender differences in educational achievement and implications for school improvement strategies. Educational Research, 43, 91–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, A., & Miller, D. (2009). Who can speak for the children? Implementing research-based practices in an urban school district. In S. Rosenfield & V. Berninger (Eds.), Implementing evidence-based interventions in school settings (pp. 385–414). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fayol, M. (1994). From declarative and procedural knowledge to the management of declarative and procedural knowledge. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 9, 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fayol, M. (1999). From on-line management problems to strategies in written production. In M. Torrance & G. Jefferey (Eds.), The cognitive demands of writing. Processing capacity and working memory effects in text production (pp. 13–23). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fayol, M. (2008). Toward a dynamic conception of written production. In Presentation at the Santa Barbara conference on writing research: Writing research across borders. Santa Barbara, CA.

  • Fayol, M., Jisa, H., & Mazur-Palandre, A. (2008). Information flow in written and spoken French: A developmental perspective.In Presentation at the Santa Barbara conference on writing research: Writing research across borders. Santa Barbara, CA.

  • Garner, W. R. (1974). The processing of information and structure. Potomac, MD: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, W. R. (1976). Interaction of stimulus dimensions in concept and choice processes. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 98–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garner, W. R. (1981). The role of configuration in the identification of visually degraded words. Memory & Cognition, 9, 445–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garner, W. R., Hake, H. W., & Eriksen, C. W. (1956). Operationism and the concept of perception. Psychological Review, 63, 149–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Berninger, V., Abbott, R., Abbott, S., & Whitaker, D. (1997). The role of mechanics in composing of elementary school students: A new methodological approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 170–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Berninger, V., & Weintraub, N. (1998). The relationship of handwriting style and speed and legibility. Journal of Educational Research, 91, 290–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K., & Fink, B. (2000). Is handwriting causally related to learning to write? Treatment of handwriting problems in beginning writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 620–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Weintraub, N. (1996). A review of handwriting research: Progress and prospects from 1980 to 1994. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 7–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R. (2009). From idea to text. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, M. Nystrand, & J. Riley (Eds.), SAGE handbook of writing development (in press).

  • Hayes, J. R., & Berninger, V. (2009). Relationships between idea generation and transcription: How act of writing shapes what children write. In C. Braverman, R. Krut, K. Lunsford, S. McLeod, S. Null, P. Rogers, & A. Stansell (Eds.), Traditions of writing research. New York: Routledge (in press).

  • Hayes, J. R., & Chenoweth, N. (2006). Is working memory involved in the transcribing and editing of texts? Written Communication, 23, 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinbert (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3–30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillis, A. E., Wityk, R. J., Barker, P. B., & Caramazza, A. (2003). Neural regions essential for writing verbs. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 19–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoeft, F., Ueno, T., Reiss, A.L., Meyler, A., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S., Glover, G., et al. (2009). Prediction of children’s reading skills using behavioral, functional, and structural neuroimaging measures. Behavioral Neuroscience (in press).

  • James, K. H., & Gauthier, I. (2006). Letter processing automatically recruits a sensory–motor brain network. Neuropsychologia, 44, 2937–2949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkinson, M., Bannister, P., Brady, M., & Smith, S. (2002). Improved optimisation for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images. Neuroimage, 17, 825–841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkinson, M., & Smith, S. (2001). A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Medical Image Analysis, 5, 143–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. (2004). Automaticity of the transcription process in the production of written text. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Graduate School of Education, University of Queensland, Australia.

  • Jones, D., & Cristensen, C. (1999). The relationship between automaticity in handwriting and students’ ability to generate written text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 44–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, J., Gathers, A., & Piper, G. (2003). Shared and dissociated cortical regions for object and letter processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 56–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longcamp, M., Anton, J. L., Roth, M., & Velay, J. L. (2003). Visual presentation of single letters activates a premotor area involved in writing. Neuroimage, 19, 1492–1500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longcamp, M., Boucard, C., Gilhodes, J.-C., Anton, J.-L., Roth, M., Nazarian, B., et al. (2008). Learning through hand- or typewriting influences visual recognition of new graphic shapes: Behavioral and functional imaging evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 802–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longcamp, M., Zerbato-Puodou, M., Velay, J. L. (2005). The influence of writing practice on letter recognition in preschool children: A comparison between handwriting and typing. Acta Psychologia, 119, 67–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D., & Hoover, H. (1987). Sex differences in educational achievement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Early Adolescence, 7, 65–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olive, T., & Kellogg, R. (2002). Concurrent activation of high- and low-level production processes in written composition. Memory & Cognition, 30, 594–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peverley, S. (2006). The importance of handwriting speed in adult writing. Implications for automaticity and working memory. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 197–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psychological Corporation. (2002). Wechsler individual achievement test (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, T., Aylward, E., Berninger, V., Field, K., Parsons, A., Richards, A., et al. (2006). Individual fMRI activation in orthographic mapping and morpheme mapping after orthographic or morphological spelling treatment in child dyslexics. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 19, 56–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, T., Berninger, V., & Fayol, M. (2009a). FMRI activation differences between 11-year-old good and poor spellers’ access in working memory to temporary and long-term orthographic representations. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22, 327–353. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2008.11.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, T., Berninger, V., Nagy, W., Parsons, A., Field, K., & Richards, A. (2005). Brain activation during language task contrasts in children with and without dyslexia: Inferring mapping processes and assessing response to spelling instruction. Educational and Child Psychology, 22(2), 62–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, T., Berninger, V., Stock, P., Altemeier, L., Trivedi, P., & Maravilla, K. (2009b). fMRI sequential-finger movement activation differentiating good and poor writers. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 29, 1–17. doi:10.1080/13803390902780201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, T., Berninger, V., Winn, W., Swanson, H. L., Stock, P., Liang, O., et al. (2009c). Differences in fMRI activation between children with and without spelling disability on 2-back/0-back working memory contrast. Journal of Writing Research, 1(2), 93–123. (Journal of Writing Research is an open access peer reviewed journal available online: Download the articles from the JOWR-website).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieben, L., Ntamakiliro, L., Gonthier, B., & Fayol, M. (2005). Effects of various early writing practices on reading and spelling. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 145–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakurai, Y., Onuma, Y., Nakazawa, G., Ugawa, Y., Momose, T., Tsuji, S., et al. (2007). Parietal dysgraphia: Characterization of abnormal writing stroke sequences, character formation, and character recall. Behavioral Neurology, 18, 99–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seitz, R., Canavan, A., Yaguez, L., Herzog, H., Tellman, L., Knorr, U., et al. (1997). Representations of graphomotor trajectories in the human parietal cortex: Evidence for controlled processing and automatic performance. European Journal Neuroscience, 9, 378–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shmuel, A., Augath, M., Oeltermann, A., & Logothetis, N. (2006). Negative functional MRI response correlates with decreases in neuronal activity in moneky visual area V1. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 569–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. (2002). Fast robust automated brain extraction. Human Brain Mapping, 17, 143–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., & Berninger, V. (1996). Individual differences in children’s working memory and writing skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 63, 358–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, L., Spinks, J., Eden, G., Perfetti, C., & Siok, W. (2005). Reading depends on writing, in Chinese. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 8781–8785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, D. (2003). Wechsler intelligence scale for children, 4th edition (WISC IV). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolrich, M. W., Ripley, B. D., Brady, J. M., & Smith, S. M. (2001). Temporal autocorrelation in univariate linear modeling of FMRI data. Neuroimage, 14, 1370–1386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worsley, K. J., Evans, A. C., Marrett, S., & Neelin, P. (1992). A three-dimensional statistical analysis for CBF activation studies in human brain. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 12, 900–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Jeff Stevenson for his technical help in developing the MR imaging protocols used on the Philips Achieva 3T Scanner. Grants HD 25858 and P50 33812 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) supported this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Box 357115, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Todd L. Richards & Kenneth R. Maravilla

  2. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Washington, Box 353600, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Virginia W. Berninger, Pat Stock, Leah Altemeier & Pamala Trivedi

Authors
  1. Todd L. Richards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Virginia W. Berninger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pat Stock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Leah Altemeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pamala Trivedi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kenneth R. Maravilla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Todd L. Richards or Virginia W. Berninger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Richards, T.L., Berninger, V.W., Stock, P. et al. Differences between good and poor child writers on fMRI contrasts for writing newly taught and highly practiced letter forms. Read Writ 24, 493–516 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9217-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9217-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation