This investigation was designed to examine the acquisition, generalization, and maintenance effects of a treatment for sound errors in speakers with co-occurring apraxia of speech and aphasia. Three speakers with chronic apraxia of speech and aphasia were studied in the context of a multiple baseline design across speakers and behaviors. Treatment combined the use of minimal contrast pairs with traditional sound production training techniques such as integral stimulation and articulatory placement cueing and was applied sequentially to sounds that were determined to be consistently in error before training. Results revealed increased correct sound productions for all speakers in trained and untrained words. Response generalization effects across sounds and stimulus generalization effects varied, but appeared to be limited for most speakers. Although positive maintenance effects were evidenced, some loss of treatment gains was noted following cessation of treatment.
Some current models of aphasia emphasize a role of short-term memory in the processing of language and propose that the language impairment in aphasia involves impairment to cognitive processes that activate and maintain representations of words over the time-period needed to support single word and multiple word tasks, including verbal span tasks. This paper reports normative data from 39 people with aphasia and 16 age-matched neurotypical controls on a test battery for aphasia that assesses effects of increased short-term/working memory load on word and sentence processing as well as effects of linguistic variations on verbal short-term memory abilities Two concepts are discussed that capture the unique potential of this test battery for research and clinical practice: specificity of diagnosis and sensitivity to all degrees of aphasia severity, including mild aphasia. An analysis is included that shows how the performance of individuals with mild aphasia who achieve normal level of performance on the Western Aphasia Battery (Kertesz, 2006) show a decline in a temporal delay condition that is greater than performance of control participants. We also report preliminary data showing differential effects of adding a time interval before a response or between items to be compared: reduced accuracy for some individuals with aphasia and improved accuracy for others. The theoretical and clinical importance of this finding is discussed, as well as the overall potential for this test battery to be used in research and as a clinical tool. Finally, we discuss the relevance of this test battery to investigate functional communication abilities in aphasia.
Background Verbal short-term memory (STM) impairments are invariably present in aphasia. Word processing involves a minimal form of verbal STM, i.e., the time course over which semantic and phonological representations are activated and maintained until they are comprehended, produced, or repeated. Thus it is reasonable that impairments of word processing and verbal STM may co-occur. The co-occurrence of language and STM impairments in aphasia has motivated an active area of research that has revealed much about the relationship of these two systems and the effect of their impairment on language function and verbal learning (Freedman & Martin, 2001; Martin & Saffran, 1999; Trojano & Grossi, 1995). In keeping with this view a number of researchers have developed treatment protocols to improve verbal STM in order to improve language function (e.g., Koenig-Bruhin & Studer-Eichenberger, 2007). This account of aphasia predicts that treatment of a fundamental ability, such as STM, which supports language function, should lead to improvements that generalise to content and tasks beyond those implemented in treatment. Aims We investigated the efficacy of a treatment for language impairment that targets two language support processes: verbal short-term memory (STM) and executive processing, in the context of a language task (repetition). We hypothesised that treatment of these abilities would improve repetition abilities and performance on other language tasks that require STM. Method A single-participant, multiple-baseline, multiple-probe design across behaviours was used with a participant with conduction aphasia. The treatment involved repetition of words and nonwords under three “interval” conditions, which varied the time between hearing and repeating the stimulus. Measures of treatment effects included acquisition, maintenance, and follow-up data, effect sizes, and pre- and post-treatment performance on a test battery that varies the STM and executive function demands of language tasks. Outcomes & Results Improvement of repetition was mostly specific to treated stimuli. Post-treatment measures of language ability indicated improvements in single and multiple word processing tasks, verbal working memory tasks, and verbal span. Conclusions Treatment of STM and executive processes in the context of a word repetition task resulted in improvements in other non-treated language tasks. The approach used in this study can be incorporated into other language-processing tasks typically used in treatment of language disorders (e.g., sentence processing).
Background Language performance in aphasia can vary depending on several variables such as stimulus characteristics and task demands. This study focuses on the degree of verbal working memory (WM) load inherent in the language task and how this variable affects language performance by individuals with aphasia. Aims The first aim was to identify the effects of increased verbal WM load on the performance of judgments of semantic similarity (synonymy) and phonological similarity (rhyming). The second aim was to determine if any of the following abilities could modulate the verbal WM load effect: semantic or phonological access, semantic or phonological short-term memory (STM) and any of the following executive processing abilities: inhibition, verbal WM updating, and set shifting. Method and Procedures Thirty-one individuals with aphasia and 11 controls participated in this study. They were administered a synonymy judgment task and a rhyming judgment task under high and low verbal WM load conditions that were compared to each other. In a second set of analyses, multiple regression was used to identify which factors (as noted above) modulated the verbal WM load effect. Outcome and Results For participants with aphasia, increased verbal WM load significantly reduced accuracy of performance on synonymy and rhyming judgments. Better performance in the low verbal WM load conditions was evident even after correcting for chance. The synonymy task included concrete and abstract word triplets. When these were examined separately, the verbal WM load effect was significant for the abstract words, but not the concrete words. The same pattern was observed in the performance of the control participants. Additionally, the second set of analyses revealed that semantic STM and one executive function, inhibition ability, emerged as the strongest predictors of the verbal WM load effect in these judgment tasks for individuals with aphasia. Conclusions The results of this study have important implications for diagnosis and treatment of aphasia. As the roles of verbal STM capacity, executive functions and verbal WM load in language processing are better understood, measurements of these variables can be incorporated into our diagnostic protocols. Moreover, if cognitive abilities such as STM and executive functions support language processing and their impairment adversely affects language function, treating them directly in the context of language tasks should translate into improved language function.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.