In this article we argue that cultural–historical neuropsychology manages to escape the theoretical stagnation that characterises the field of dyslexia. To support our argumentation, we first define cultural–historical psychology and neuropsychology and determine their subject matter. Afterwards, we provide an outline of how reading and reading difficulties are perceived through the prism of cultural–historical neuropsychology. We then discuss several mainstream conceptualisations of dyslexia that contribute to the theoretical stagnation in the field. Finally, we explain how cultural–historical neuropsychology avoids each theoretical barrier imposed by mainstream conceptualisations.
AfonsoO.Suárez-CoallaP.CuetosF. (2020). Writing impairments in Spanish children with developmental dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219419876255
2.
AkhutinaT. V. (2003). L. S. Vygotsky and A. R. Luria: Foundations of neuropsychology. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 41(3–4), 159–190. https://doi.org/10.2753/RPO1061-0405410304159
3.
AkhutinaT. V.PylaevaN. M. (2012). Overcoming learning disabilities: A Vygotskian-Lurian neuropsychological approach. Cambridge University Press.
CasadiegoA.GuillénJ.SolovievaY.ReginaM. (2019). Análisis lingüístico clínico de las alteraciones fonológicas en el niño: un estudio de caso [Clinical linguistic analysis of phonological alternations in children: A case study]. Revista Chilena de Fonoaudiología, 18, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.5354/0719-4692.2019.55322
6.
DirksE.SpyerG.van LieshoutE. C.de SonnevilleL. (2008). Prevalence of combined reading and arithmetic disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(5), 460–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219408321128
7.
DöhlaD.HeimS. (2016). Developmental dyslexia and dysgraphia: What can we learn from the one about the other?Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 2045. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02045
8.
DoleanD.Melby-LervågM.TincasI.DamsaC.LervågA. (2019). Achievement gap: Socioeconomic status affects reading development beyond language and cognition in children facing poverty. Learning and Instruction, 63, Article 1012183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101218
ElkoninD. B.VygotskyL. V. (2001). Symbolic mediation and joint action. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 39(4), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.2753/RPO1061-040539049
ElliottJ. G.GrigorenkoE. L. (2014). The dyslexia debate. Cambridge University Press.
13.
FostickL.RevahH. (2018). Dyslexia as a multi-deficit disorder: Working memory and auditory temporal processing. Acta Psychologica, 183, 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.12.010
GlozmanJ. M. (2007). A. R. Luria and the history of Russian neuropsychology. Journal of the History of the Neurosciences, 16(1–2), 168–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/09647040600550368
16.
GlozmanJ. M. (2011). Remediation of learning disabled children following L. S. Vygotsky’s approach. Psychology in Russia. State of the Art, 4, 268–278. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2011.0016
KirbyP. (2020). Dyslexia debated, then and now: A historical perspective on the dyslexia debate. Oxford Review of Education, 46(4), 472–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2020.1747418
21.
LanderlK.RamusF.MollK.LyytinenH.LeppänenP. H. T.LohvansuuK.O’DonovanM.WilliamsJ.BartlingJ.BruderJ.KunzeS.NeuhoffN.TóthD.HonbolygóF.CsépeV.BogliottiC.IannuzziS.ChaixY.DémonetJ.- F.LongerasE.. . . Schulte-KörneG. (2013). Predictors of developmental dyslexia in European orthographies with varying complexity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(6), 686–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12029
22.
LeontievA. N. (1975). Activity. Consciousness. Personality. Moscow State University.
23.
LeontievA. N.ZaporozhetsA. V. (2016). Dinámica general de la rehabilitación de los movimientos [General dynamic of the rehabilitation of movements]. In QuintanarL.SolovievaY. (Eds.), Rehabilitación neuropsicológica: Historia, teoría y práctica (pp. 15–34). Universidad Autónoma de Puebla.
24.
Londoño-MunozN.JiménezS.GonzálesD.SolovievaY. (2016). Análisis de los errores en la lectura y en el lenguaje en niños de Educación Primaria [Analysis of reading and oral language errors of primary school children]. Ocnos: Revista de Estudios sobre la Lectura, 15(1), 97–113. https://doi.org/10.18239/ocnos_2016.15.1.931
25.
LopesJ. A.GomesC.OliveiraC. R.ElliottJ. G. (2020). Research studies on dyslexia: Participant inclusion and exclusion criteria. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(5), 587–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2020.1732108
LuriaA. (1970b). Traumatic aphasia: Its syndromes, psychology, and treatment. Mouton.
29.
LuriaA. R. (1973). Neuropsychological studies in the URSS. A review. I. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of United States of America, 70(3), 959–964. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.70.3.959
30.
LuriaA. R. (1976). The basic problems of neurolinguistics. Mouton.
31.
LuriaA. (1980). Higher cortical functions in man. Springer.
32.
LuriaA. R.TsvetkovaL. S. (1966). Rehabilitative education and its importance for psychology and pedagogy. Soviet Education, 8(5), 46–55. https://doi.org/10.2753/RES1060-9393080546
33.
LyonG. R.WeiserB. (2013). The state of the science in learning disabilities: Research impact on the field from 2001 to 2011. In SwansonH. L.HarrisK. R.GrahamS. (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 118–151). Guilford Press.
34.
MenghiniD.FinziA.BenassiM.BolzaniR.FacoettiA.GiovagnoliS.RuffinoM.VicariS. (2010). Different underlying neurocognitive deficits in developmental dyslexia: A comparative study. Neuropsychologia, 48(4), 863–872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.11.003
35.
Ochoa CardonaM. F.Quintanar RojasL. (2018). Effects of neuropsychological intervention in a child with functional deficit in programming and control. In GlozmanJ. M.VindekerO. S.ErshovaI. A.PermiakovaM. E. (Eds.), The fifth international Luria memorial congress. Lurian approach in international psychological science (pp. 660–671). KnE Life Sciences. https://doi.org/10.18502/kls.v4i8.3324
PenningtonB. F.Santerre-LemmonL.RosenbergJ.MacDonaldB.BoadaR.FriendA.LeopoldD. R.SamuelssonS.ByrneB.WillcuttE. G.OlsonR. K. (2012). Individual prediction of dyslexia by single versus multiple deficit models. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121(1), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025823
38.
PetersL.AnsariD. (2019). Are specific learning disorders truly specific, and are they disorders?Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 17, Article 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2019.100115
39.
PowerA. J.CollingL. J.MeadN.BarnesL.GoswamiU. (2016). Neural encoding of the speech envelope by children with developmental dyslexia. Brain and Language, 160, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2016.06.006
40.
ProtopapasA. (2019). Evolving concepts of dyslexia and their implications for research and remediation. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2873. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02873
41.
ProvazzaS.AdamsA. -M.GiofrèD.RobertsD. J. (2019). Double trouble: Visual and phonological impairments in English dyslexic readers. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2725. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02725
42.
QuintanarL.SolovievaY.León-CarriónJ. (2011). Evaluación clínica neuropsicológica de la afasia Puebla-Sevilla [Clinical neuropsychological evaluation of the Puebla-Sevilla aphasia]. Universidad Autónoma de Puebla.
43.
RaddatzJ.KuhnJ. T.HollingH.MollK.DobelC. (2016). Comorbidity of arithmetic and reading disorder. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(3), 298–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219415620899
44.
RamusF. (2001). Outstanding questions about phonological processing in dyslexia. Dyslexia, 7(4), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.205
RingJ.BlackJ. L. (2018). The multiple deficit model of dyslexia: What does it mean for identification and intervention?Annals of Dyslexia, 68(2), 104–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-018-0157-y
SolovievaY.AkhutinaT.QuintanarL.HazinI. (2019). Historical-cultural neuropsychology: A systemic and integral approach of psychological functions and their cerebral bases. Estudos de Psicología, 24(1), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.22491/1678-4669.20190008
49.
SolovievaY.QuintanarL. (2017). Organization of playing activity at preschool age. In BruceT.HakarainenP.BredikyteM. (Eds.), International handbook of early childhood play (pp. 340–354.). Taylor & Francis.
50.
SolovievaY.QuintanarL. (2019). Playing activity with orientation as a method for preschool development. Psychological Educational Studies, 11(4), 49–66. https://doi.org/10.17759/psyedu.201911040
51.
SolovievaY.TorradoO.QuintanarL. (2018). Orientation for initial introduction of written speech in primary school. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 24(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.9734/JESBS/2018/40638
52.
SolovievaY.TorradoO.QuintanarL. (2019). Learning of reading and writing in primary school: A method of reflective and conscious analysis of words. In HusV. (Ed.), Perspectives of arts and social science: Vol. 2 (pp. 80–104). BP International. https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/pass/v2
53.
StanovichK. E.SiegelL. S. (1994). Phenotypic performance profile of children with reading disabilities: A regression-based test of the phonological core variable. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 24–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.24
54.
SwanD.GoswamiU. (1997). Phonological awareness deficits in developmental dyslexia and the phonological representations hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66(1), 18–41. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1997.2375
55.
SzűcsD. (2016). Subtypes and comorbidity in mathematical learning disabilities: Multidimensional study of verbal and visual memory processes is key to understanding. In CappellettiM.FiasW. (Eds.), Progress in brain research: Vol. 227. The mathematical brain across the lifespan (pp. 277–304). Science Direct. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2016.04.027
56.
ToomelaA. (2007). Culture of science: Strange history of the methodological thinking in psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 41(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-007-9004-0
57.
ToomelaA. (2009). How methodology became a toolbox—and how it escapes from that box. In ValsinerJ.MolenaarP.LyraM.ChaudharyN. (Eds.), Dynamic process methodology in the social and developmental sciences (pp. 45–66). Springer.
58.
ToomelaA. (2010). Methodology of idiographic science: Limits of single-case studies and the role of typology. In SalvatoreS.ValsinerJ.Simon TraversJ.GennaroA. (Eds.), Yearbook of idiographic science: Vol. 2 (pp. 13–33). Firera Publishing.
59.
ToomelaA. (2014a). Mainstream psychology. In TeoT. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of critical psychology (pp. 1117–1125). Springer.
60.
ToomelaA. (2014b). There can be no cultural-historical psychology without neuropsychology. And vice versa. In YasnitskyA.Van Der VeerR.FerrariM. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of cultural-historical psychology (pp. 315–349). Cambridge University Press.
61.
ToomelaA. (2020). Psychology today: Still in denial, still outdated. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 54, 563–571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09534-3
62.
TorppaM.EklundK.Van BergenE.LyytinenH. (2015). Late-emerging and resolving dyslexia: A follow-up study from age 3 to 14. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43(7), 1389–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0003-1
63.
TorradoO.SolovievaY.QuintanarL. (2018). Análisis comparativo de la adquisición del proceso lectoescritor ante distintos métodos de enseñanza [Comparative analysis of the acquisition of the processes of reading and writing with different teaching methods]. Revista Neuropsicología Latinoamericana. SLAN, 10(2), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.5579/ml.2016.0401
TsvetkovaL. (2004). Rehabilitation of psychological superior functions. Moscow State University.
66.
van BergenE.BishopD.van ZuijenT.de JongP. F. (2015). How does parental reading influence children’s reading? A study of cognitive mediation. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(5), 325–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2015.1050103
67.
van BergenE.van der LeijA.de JongP. F. (2014). The intergenerational multiple deficit model and the case of dyslexia. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 346. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00346
68.
VeresovN. (2009). Forgotten methodology: Vygotsky’s case. In ToomelaA.VaalsinerJ. (Eds.), Methodological thinking in psychology: 60 years gone astray? (pp. 267–295). Information Age Publishing.
69.
VeresovN. (2010). Introducing cultural historical theory: Main concepts and principles of genetic research methodology. Cultural–Historical Psychology, 6(4), 83–90. https://psyjournals.ru/en/kip/2010/n4/Veresov.shtml
70.
VeresovN. (2020). Discovering the great royal seal: New reality of Vygotsky’s legacy. Cultural–Historical Psychology, 16(2), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2020160212
VygotskyL. S. (2004). The historical meaning of the crisis in psychology: A methodological investigation. In RieberR. W.RobinsonD. K. (Eds.), The essential Vygotsky (pp. 227–344). Kluwer.
73.
VygotskyL. S. (2019). Lecture 4. In KelloggD.VeresovN. (Eds.), L. S. Vygotsky’s pedological works: Vol. 1. Foundations of pedology (pp. 65–84). Springer.
74.
VygotskyL. S.LuriaA. (1994). Tool and symbol in child development. In van der VeerR.ValsinerJ. (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99–174). Blackwell.
75.
WillcuttE. G.PenningtonB. F.OlsonR. K.ChhabildasN.HulslanderJ. (2005). Neuropsychological analyses of comorbidity between reading disability and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: In search of the common deficit. Developmental Neuropsychology, 27(1), 35–78. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2701_3
76.
WillcuttE. G.PetrillS. A.WuS.BoadaR.DefriesJ. C.OlsonR. K.PenningtonB. F. (2013). Comorbidity between reading disability and math disability: Concurrent psychopathology, functional impairment, and neuropsychological functioning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(6), 500–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413477476
