Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

Sec. Learning and Memory

Volume 19 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2025.1560362

This article is part of the Research Topic Comorbidity, Severity and Neurobiological Correlates in Specific Learning Disorders: Prevention and Integrated Multimodal Intervention View all 3 articles

Impaired Instance acquisition as a Cause of the Comorbidity of Learning Disorders in Young Adults

Provisionally accepted
  • 1 University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
  • 2 Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Lazio, Italy
  • 3 University of Salento, Lecce, Apulia, Italy
  • 4 Pegaso University, Naples, Campania, Italy

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Introduction: The “instance theory of automatization” suggests that automaticity relies on acquiring specific instances that enhance performance, preventing the slower application of procedures. It has been proposed that a low ability in instance acquisition may be the key cause of the comorbidity among learning disorders. We investigated performance on a learning task to test the hypothesis that difficulties in acquiring and consolidating instances would be linked with comorbid learning disorders. Methods: We examined the individual rate of learning of 143 young adults with typical development (32M, 111F, mean age: 20.3) and 59 with specific learning disorders (SLD; 12M and 47F, mean age: 20.9).Results: Both groups significantly reduced their response times across learning trials (following a power trend) without generalization to untrained items, indicating that learning occurred through instance acquisition. Initially, participants with SLD performed worse than the controls. However, they reduced their times by about 96 sec with practice, even though their “endpoint” (asymptote) remained slower than controls. Group differences were related to these two scaling values, not the power curve coefficient. Subsequently, we reclassified the sample into three groups based on the type of deficit: one without procedural/instance deficits ("Control" group), one with selective deficits in “procedural” tasks ("Poor procedural" group), and one with deficits in instance-based tasks ("Poor instance" group). The poor instance group not only showed deficits across all tasks requiring instance retrieval (i.e., arithmetical facts and lexical representation retrieval) but was also slower (86 sec) in the learning task compared to the other groups (58 and 70 sec, respectively; at least p < .01). The “Poor procedural” group behaved similarly to the “Control” group. Conclusion: Results support with the notion that a low ability to acquire and consolidate instances may contribute to the comorbidity of learning disorders.

    Keywords: Dyslexia, Instance learning, automatization, Learning Disorders, comorbidity Formattato: Giustificato, Interlinea: 1, 5 righe

    Received: 14 Jan 2025; Accepted: 31 Mar 2025.

    Copyright: © 2025 Marinelli, Nardacchione, Martelli, Tommasi, Turi, Angelelli, Limone and Zoccolotti. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Giuliana Nardacchione, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
    Vincenza Tommasi, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

    Research integrity at Frontiers

    Man ultramarathon runner in the mountains he trains at sunset

    95% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good

    Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.


    Find out more