Preliminary Report on Neuroanatomical Differences Among Reading Disabled, Nonverbally Gifted, and Gifted-Reading Disabled College Students

Figures & data

Table 1. Descriptive and mean comparison data for reading disabled (RD), Gifted (G), and Gifted-Reading Disabled (GRD) subjects a and b.

	Mean (SD)			2-tailed Significance of t-test
	RD	GRD	G	RD vs. GRD	G vs. GRD
AGE	20.7 (1.21)	22.1 (4.09)	20.4 (1.52)	.43	.39
WASI VIQ^c	99 (11.61)	103.6 (14.65)	103.8 (4.15)	.54	.98
WASI PIQ	109.5 (11.19)	125.8 (3.77)	126.6 (4.04)	.00	.73
WASI FSIQ	104.5 (11.54)	115.4 (10.99)	115.6 (2.61)	.09	.97
WRAT WRec^c	91.3 (11.38)	97.1 (14.42)	120.8 (17.79)	.43	.02
WRAT SC	99.5 (13.49)	107.7 (11.95)	116.2 (10.18)	.25	.21
WRAT Spell	89.5 (12.92)	92.9 (7.78)	118.0 (20.21)	.55	.00
WRAT Math	109.5 (16.89)	113.1 (15.19)	123.6 (9.74)	.68	.19
RAN L^d	101.2 (5.42)	97.8 (9.67)	108.8 (6.61)	.46	.05
RAN 2LN	102.0 (10.43)	97.1 (17.72)	111.6 (4.56)	.56	.10
RAN 3LN	95.3 (14.24)	93.4 (23.72)	114.8 (8.87)	.87	.08
WJ RF^c	96.7 (5.99)	89.5 (9.56)	104.4 (6.87)	.13	.01
WJ PC	98.3 (6.53)	104.4 (7.30)	113.8 (7.43)	.13	.05
WJ SR	103.7 (6.74)	109.4 (7.85)	117.8 (8.23)	.18	.09
MRI Reading^e (%Acc.)	77.4 (7.11)	76.9 (9.94)	88.6 (4.64)	.92	.03
MRI Reading^f (RT)	2052.7 (478.9)	1976.5 (184.9)	1692.6 (275.0)	.68	.05
MRI Spatial (% Acc.)	71.1 (18.7)	83.2 (4.1)	90.4 (3.7)	.09	.00
MRI Spatial (RT)	2338.3 (528.1)	2238.3 (190.6)	2076.4 (291.4)	.63	.25

Note. ^aNumber of subjects in all analyses: 6 RD, 8 GRD, 5 G. ^bWhere variances were unequal, corrections were applied to t/df’s. ^cWASI IQs, WRAT subtests and WJ subtests are age corrected standard scores. ^dRAN composites created as per manual in age corrected standard score form. ^eMRI task performance data are in percent correct. ^fMRI task response data are in ms.

Table 2. Regions of interest.

Free Surfer Regions: ROIs^a	Hemisphere	BA^b	Common Anatomical Location^c
Lateral Occipital Cortex	Rt & Lft	17,18,19	Inferior Occipital Cortex, Middle Occipital Cortex
Inferior Parietal Lobule	Rt & Lft	39,40	Inferior Parietal Lobule, Angular Gyrus
Superior Temporal Gyrus	Rt & Lft	22, 41,42	Primary Auditory Cortex, Wernicke’s Area, Heschl’s Gyrus
Mid Temporal Gyrus	Rt	21	Middle Temporal Gyrus
Pars opercularis	Lft	44	Pars opercularis, Broca’s Area, Inferior Frontal Gyrus
Pars triangularis	Lft	45	Pars triangularis Broca’s Area, Inferior Frontal Gyrus
Pars orbitalis	Lft	44	Pars orbitalis, Inferior Frontal Gyrus Orbitofrontal Cortex Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex

Note. ^aAreas extrapolated from (Gilger et al., 2013). Each ROI is assessed for area and thickness. See text for description of how these areas were chosen. Right hemisphere (Rt) or left hemisphere (Lft) location of ROI. ^bApproximate Brodmann Areas. Some Free Surfer ROIs do not have clear Brodmann boundaries. ^cAnatomical locations are common names and may vary by reference or differ from Free Surfer labels. Some Free Surfer ROIs do not have direct correspondences to common anatomical boundaries.

Table 3. Significant (p ≤ 0.05) ROIs Contrasting G to GRD or RD to GRD^a.

Free Surfer ROI	Left Hemisphere Partial r, p-value	Right Hemisphere Partial r, p-value	Direction of Difference
Lateral occipital area	−0.737, 0.010	N.S.	G > GRD
Medial temporal area	N.A.	0.759, 0.007	RD < GRD
Inferior parietal thickness	N.S.	−0.864, 0.001^b	RD > GRD
Superior temporal thickness	−0.668, 0.025	−0.700, 0.016	RD > GRD
Pars opercularis	N.S.	N.A.	N.A.
Pars triangularis area	0.877, 0.000^b	N.A.	RD < GRD
Parsorbitalis thickness	−0.680, 0.021	N.A.	RD > GRD

Note. ^aPartial correlations derived from final full multiple R model, all predictors entered: ROI = Age + Sex + GRD-G or GRD-RD grouping. G or RD coded 1, GRD coded 2 for analyses. Overall brain size/volume has been controlled (see text). Negative r: size/thickness increases for G or RD relative to GRD; Positive r: size/thickness increases for GRD relative to G or RD. NA: region not examined; NS: region examined but not statistically significant. Age and sex were not significant in any equations. ^bSignificant after Bonferroni Type 1 error correction (Hays, 1981).

Figure 1. Regions-of-Interest exhibiting significant anatomical between-group differences.

Gilger, J. W., Talavage, T. M., & Olulade, O. A. (2013). An fMRI study of nonverbally gifted reading disabled adults: Has deficit compensation effected gifted potential? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00507

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hays, W. L. (1981). Statistics (3rd ed.). New York, NY: CBS College.

 Google Scholar