Exploring the dynamics of aphasic word production using the picture–word interference task: A case study

Wilshire, Carolyn E.; Keall, Leonie Michelle; Stuart, Elizabeth J.; O'Donnell, Debra J

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.08.026

Cited by 24 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The miscueing effect we have reported here could be considered as comparable to the disadvantage obtained with semantically related distractors in the picture word interference paradigm, when the stimulus onset asynchrony between picture and distractor is either simultaneous or þ/À100 ms (Caramazza & Costa, 2000, 2001Costa, Alario, & Caramazza, 2005;Glaser & Glaser, 1989;Levelt, Roelofs, & Meyer, 1999;Wilshire, Keall, Stuart, & O'Donnell, 2007;de Zubaricay, Wilson, McMahon, & Muthiah, 2001). However, the crucial difference is that in our cued naming paradigm, only a single distractor phoneme is presented, whereas in picture word interference, a whole distractor word is provided.…”

Section: Implications For Models Of Speech Productionsupporting

confidence: 70%

“L” is for tiger: Effects of phonological (mis)cueing on picture naming in semantic aphasia

Soni

Ralph

Noonan

et al. 2009

Journal of Neurolinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tSemantic aphasia (SA) refers to a subset of aphasic patients who exhibit multimodal semantic deficits (Jefferies, E., & Lambon Ralph, M. (2006). Semantic impairment in stroke aphasia vs semantic dementia: a case-series comparison. Brain, 129(8), 2132-2147). Consistent with their underlying semantic control deficit, SA picture naming accuracy can be improved considerably with a correct phonological cue. The performance of normal individuals in the tempo picture naming paradigm reveals an increased impact of both correct and incorrect phonological cueing, and it has been suggested that this technique reduces resources available for semantic control in neurologically-intact participants (Hodgson, C., & Lambon Ralph, M. (2008). Mimicking aphasic semantic naming errors in normal speech production: Evidence from a novel experimental paradigm. Brain and Language, 104(1), 89-101.). We tested this hypothesis by considering the impact of both correct and incorrect phonological cues on picture naming in a case series of SA patients, using exactly the same items as those presented to normal participants for tempo naming. The results confirmed the positive effect of correct cues and revealed for the first time the negative effects of category co-ordinate miscues amongst these patients in both overall accuracy and semantic error rates. The implications of our results for current speech production models are considered.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Models Of Speech Productionsupporting

confidence: 70%

“L” is for tiger: Effects of phonological (mis)cueing on picture naming in semantic aphasia

Soni

Ralph

Noonan

et al. 2009

Journal of Neurolinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although previous research suggests that phonologically related distractor words produce a facilitation effect; such effects have been found when distractor words are presented simultaneously with, or immediately following, picture presentation (Ferreira & Pashler, 2002;Melinger & Rahman, 2004;Wilshire et al, 2007). In the current study all distractor stimuli were presented immediately prior to picture presentation.…”

Section: Healthy Ageing and Lateralised Picture-word Interference Effmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…In contrast to Hashimoto and Thompson (2010), a case study conducted by Wilshire et al (2007) reported facilitation of naming from semantic distractor words. This result was thought to relate to prolonged semantic processing in this individual, and suggests that semantic distractors may facilitate naming when there is a deficit at the level of semantic processing required for word production by increasing semantic activation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Either interference or facilitation of naming, as measured by a decrease/increase in the speed and accuracy of naming relative to a picture-alone condition, has been found depending on whether distractor words are semantically or phonologically related, as well as whether distractor words are presented before, during, or after picture presentation (e.g., Lupker & Sanders, 1982). A facilitation effect, or increase in the speed and/or accuracy of naming, is often found when phonologically related words are presented simultaneously with or immediately following picture presentation (Ferreira & Pashler, 2002;Melinger & Rahman, 2004;Schriefers, Meyer, & Levelt, 1990;Wilshire, Keall, Stuart, & O'Donnell, 2007). In contrast, an interference effect, or decrease in the speed and/or accuracy of naming, is often observed when semantically related distractor words appear immediately prior to picture presentation (Ferreira & Pashler, 2002;Lupker & Sanders, 1982;Melinger & Rahman, 2004;Schriefers et al, 1990;Wilshire et al, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Manipulating hemispheric attentional mechanisms to modulate word retrieval in aphasia

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Emerging evidence suggests that left hemisphere damage may create an attentional bias towards stimuli initially processed in the right hemisphere. Aims: The current study aimed to investigate whether this hemispheric attentional bias influences spoken word production in a picture-word interference task. Methods & Procedures: Two participants with aphasia and seven healthy controls named centrally presented pictures that were preceded by a distractor word which appeared in either the left or right visual field 200 ms prior to the picture. Distractor words were semantically related, phonologically related, unrelated, or the name of the picture. Results were analysed in terms of response times and accuracy. Outcomes & Results: A greater overall facilitation effect was found in the left visual field/right hemisphere condition for both participants with aphasia, however this varied depending on distractor condition. These results are consistent with an attentional bias towards linguistic stimuli initially presented to the right hemisphere. In contrast, the results of the control group suggest a reduction in the lateralisation of language processing to the left hemisphere in healthy ageing. Conclusions: These results suggest that spoken word production may be influenced by changes in attentional mechanisms following left hemisphere damage in aphasia, as well as changes in hemispheric lateralisation and inhibition in healthy ageing. Identifying attentional conditions that optimise language performance in aphasia may have implications for new treatments in language rehabilitation.

show abstract

“…A semantic interference effect (SIE), where the presentation of a distractor disrupts picture naming, has frequently been found in normal participants using categorically related distractors with either simultaneous target/distractor presentation or negative stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), where distractor precedes target (Caramazza & Costa, 2000, 2001Costa, Alario, & Caramazza, 2005;de Zubaricay, Wilson, McMahon, & Muthiah, 2001;Glaser & Glaser, 1989;Levelt, Roelofs, & Meyer, 1999;Wilshire, Keall, Stuart, & O'Donnell, 2007). This accords with the diminished performance found in co-ordinate cued naming with simultaneous target/cue presentation (Hodgson & Lambon Ralph, 2008;Howard & Gatehouse, 2006;Lambon Ralph et al, 2000;Soni et al, 2009).…”

Section: Associative Cueing In Semantic Accessmentioning

confidence: 85%

“W” is for bath: Can associative errors be cued?

Soni

Ralph

Woollams

2011

Journal of Neurolinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exploring the dynamics of aphasic word production using the picture–word interference task: A case study

Cited by 24 publications

References 48 publications

“L” is for tiger: Effects of phonological (mis)cueing on picture naming in semantic aphasia

“L” is for tiger: Effects of phonological (mis)cueing on picture naming in semantic aphasia

Manipulating hemispheric attentional mechanisms to modulate word retrieval in aphasia

“W” is for bath: Can associative errors be cued?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About