The N400 in readers with dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess whether (i) significant differences exist in the N400 response to lexico-semantic tasks between typically developing (TD) readers and readers with dyslexia, and (ii) whether these differences are moderated by the modality of task presentation (visual vs. auditory), the type of task, age, or opaque orthography (shallow and transparent alphabets vs Chinese morpho-syllabary). Twenty studies were included in the meta-analysis, and the analysis did not demonstrate strong evidence of publication bias. An overall effect size of Hedge's g = 0.66, p < .001, was found between typically developing readers and readers with dyslexia. All moderators were found to be significant; larger effects were associated with visual modality (g = 0.692, p < .001), semantically incongruent sentence tasks (g = 0.948, p < .001), pseudowords/characters tasks (g = 0.971, p < .001), and orthography [Chinese (g = 1.015, p < .001) vs. alphabets (g = 0.539, p < .001)]. Analysis of reaction time showed Hedge's g = 1.613, p < .001. Results suggest that the N400 reliably differentiated between typically developing readers and readers with dyslexia. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

Keywords: Dyslexia; Meta-analysis; N400; Reading disability; Systematic review.