Neuropsychologia
49 (2011) 3116–
3120
Contents
lists
available
at
ScienceDirect
Neuropsychologia
j
ourna
l
ho
me
pag
e:
ww
w.elsevier.com/locate/neuropsychologia
Reading
compounds
in
neglect
dyslexia:
The
headedness
effect
Carlo
Semenza
a,b,∗
, Giorgio
Arcara
c
, Silvia
Facchini
c
,
Francesca
Meneghello
b
,
Marco
Ferraro
d
,
Laura
Passarini
b
,
Cristina
Pilosio
b
,
Giovanna
Vigato
e
,
Sara
Mondini
c,f
a
Department
of
Neuroscience,
University
of
Padova,
Italy
b
IRCCS
Ospedale
S.
Camillo,
Lido
di
Venezia,Italy
c
Department
of
General
Psychology,
University
of
Padova,
Italy
d
ASL
Padova,
Rehabilitation
Center
of
Conselve,
Italy
e
Casa
di
Riposo
“D.
Cardo”.
Cologna
Veneta,
Italy
f
Casa
di
Cura
Figlie
di
San
Camillo,
Cremona,
Italy
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
i
n
f
o
Article
history:
Received
15
June
2010
Received
in
revised
form
1
June
2011
Accepted
18
July
2011
Available online 23 July 2011
Keywords:
Noun–noun
Italian
compounds
Left-headed
Right-headed
a
b
s
t
r
a
c
t
Reading
compound
words
was
studied
in
neglect
dyslexia
in
order
to
assess
the
influence
of
‘head-
edness’.
The
‘head’
of
a
compound
is
the
component
that
determines
the
grammatical
category,
the
syntactic
(e.g.,
the
gender)
and
the
semantic
properties
of
the
compound
as
a
whole.
For
example,
in
the
word
‘blackberry’
berry
is
the
compound’s
head.
The
question
was
addressed
of
whether
or
not
the
privileged
status
of
the
head
constituent
influences
processing
and
determines
behavioural
patterns
in
the
breakdown
of
spatial
attention
in
neglect.
Italian
right-headed
(e.g.
capobanda,
band
leader)
and
left-headed
compounds
(e.g.
astronave,
spaceship)
were
administered
to
18
participants
affected
by
neglect
dyslexia.
Left-headed
compounds
were
read
better
than
right-headed
compounds.
This
result
was
not
due
to
factors
such
as
frequency,
familiarity,
age
of
acquisition
or
imageability,
since
these
effects
were
controlled.
It
is
suggested
that
attention
is
captured
by
the
head
component
after
implicit
reading
of
the
whole
word.
The
head
would
require
a
relatively
lighter
processing
load
than
the
modifier
and
benefit
from
top-down
facilitation.
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1.
Introduction
Neglect
dyslexia,
a
condition
that
may
accompany
but
also
be
dissociated
from
other
manifestations
of
visuo-spatial
neglect
(Bisiach,
Meregalli,
&
Berti,
1990;
Bisiach,
Vallar,
Perani,
Papagno,
&
Berti,
1986;
Vallar,
Burani,
&
Arduino,
2010),
manifests
itself
through
the
misreading
of
letters,
words
or
strings
of
words
that
occupy
the
controlesional
side
of
visual
space.
Neglect
errors
produced
in
single
word
reading,
due
to
right-sided
lesions
in
the
most
common
variety,
can
thus
be
omissions
and
substitu-
tions
of,
or
(less
frequently)
additions
to,
the
leftmost
portion
of
the
word.
However,
neglect
does
not
appear
to
uniformly
affect
all
types
of
material.
Importantly,
the
literature
reveals
that
reading
errors
may
be
influenced
by
the
lexical
status
of
the
target,
especially
when
the
deficit
is
not
severe
(Arduino,
Burani,
&
Vallar,
2002;
Behrmann,
Moscovitch,
Black,
&
Moser,
1990;
Cubelli
&
Beschin,
2005).
In
fact,
a
proportion
of
neglect
patients
may
read
words
better
than
nonwords
(Behrmann
et
al.,
1990;
Brunn
&
Farah,
1991;
Sieroff,
Pollatsek,
&
Posner,
1988).
∗
Corresponding
author
at:
Department
of
Neuroscience,
University
of
Padova,
via
Giustiniani
5,
35128
Padova,
Italy.
E-mail
address:
carlo.semenza@unipd.it
(C.
Semenza).
Reading
nonwords
consisting
of
a
real
root
and
a
real
affix
may
be
easier
than
when
they
contain
neither
(Arduino
et
al.,
2002).
Moreover,
words
with
more
orthographic
neighbours
are
more
difficult
to
read
than
words
with
few
orthographic
neighbours
(Arguin
&
Bub,
1997;
Riddoch,
Humphreys,
Cleton,
&
Fery,
1990).
Stored
lexical
knowledge
thus
seems
to
interfere
with
defective
visuo-spatial
processing
and
to
compensate,
at
least
partially,
for
the
attentional
problem.
This
is
interpreted
(Arduino
et
al.,
2002)
as
supporting
‘late
selection’
views
of
attentional
processing
(Deutsch
&
Deutsch,
1963;
Umiltà,
2001;
more
complex,
interactive
views,
are
also
compatible
with
this
interpretation,
e.g.,
Behrmann,
Moscovitch,
&
Moser,
1991).
It
suggests
that
spatial
attentional
components,
the
impairment
of
which
leads
to
neglect
dyslexia,
may
also
operate
at
a
later
stage
of
processing,
after
the
infor-
mation
presented
in
the
unattended
visual
area
has
undergone
a
higher-level
analyses,
including
lexical
and
semantic
process-
ing.
One
common
finding
(e.g.
Behrmann
et
al.,
1990),
is
that
when
reading
compound
words,
patients
affected
by
neglect
dyslexia
seem,
in
the
case
of
two-word
compounds,
to
respect
the
bound-
aries
between
the
first
and
the
second
component.
Thus,
in
left-sided
neglect,
they
would
omit
or
substitute
the
first
compo-
nent
more
often
than
the
second
component;
the
integrity
of
the
second
component
is
mostly
respected.
0028-3932/$
–
see
front
matter ©
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.07.020