The use of the picture–word interference paradigm to examine naming abilities in aphasic individuals

Abstract

Background Although naming deficits are well documented in aphasia, on-line measures of naming processes have been little investigated. The use of on-line measures may offer further insight into the nature of aphasic naming deficits that would otherwise be difficult to interpret when using off-line measures. Aims The temporal activation of semantic and phonological processes was tracked in older normal control and aphasic individuals using a picture–word interference paradigm. The purpose of the study was to examine how word interference results can augment and/or corroborate standard language testing in the aphasic group, as well as to examine temporal patterns of activation in the aphasic group when compared to a normal control group. Methods & Procedures A total of 20 older normal individuals and 11 aphasic individuals participated. Detailed measures of each aphasic individual's language and naming skills were obtained. A visual picture–word interference paradigm was used in which the words bore either a semantic, phonological, or no relationship to 25 pictures. These competitor words were presented at stimulus onset asynchronies of −300 ms, +300 ms, and 0 ms. Outcomes & Results Analyses of naming RTs in both groups revealed significant early semantic interference effects, mid-semantic interference effects, and mid-phonological facilitation effects. A matched control-aphasic group comparison revealed no differences in the temporal activation of effects during the course of naming. Partial support for this RT pattern was found in the aphasic naming error pattern. The aphasic group also demonstrated greater SIEs and PFEs compared to the matched control group, which indicated disruptions of the phonological processing stage. Analyses of behavioural performances of the aphasic group corroborated this finding. Conclusions The aphasic naming RTs results were unexpected given the results from the priming literature, which has supported the idea of slowed or reduced patterns of activation in aphasic individuals. However, analyses of naming RTs also confirmed the behavioural finding of a disruption surrounding phonological processes; thus, the analyses of naming latencies offers another potential means of pinpointing breakdowns of lexical access in individuals with aphasia.

Neural correlates of the semantic interference effect: New evidence from transcranial direct current stimulation

“…Previous studies have shown that tDCS can be proficiently employed to ameliorate language functions in aphasic patients (for reviews, see Cotelli et al, 2011;Hamilton et al, 2011a,b;Schlaug et al, 2011). Our findings add to this literature suggesting that tDCS can be selectively used to reduce SI in aphasic patients: in fact, although SI is a normally occurring phenomenon, its magnitude is usually heightened by brain damage to language areas (e.g., Hashimoto and Thompson, 2010;Thompson et al, 2012).…”

Semantic interference during object naming in agrammatic and logopenic primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

“…Only a few studies have used the picture-word interference paradigm for this purpose in neurologically impaired patients with naming deficits. In a study by Hashimoto and Thompson (2010), involving 11 individuals with mild aphasia resulting from stroke, aphasic participants showed abnormally heightened semantic interference effects at SOAs of −300 and 0 ms. But at SOA = +300, semantic interference effects disappeared as in normal age-matched speakers.…”

Distributional analysis of semantic interference in picture naming

“…An important tool in studying spoken word production is the picture-word interference paradigm, which has been used to obtain evidence from healthy adult speakers (e.g., Damian & Martin, 1999;Schriefers, Meyer, & Levelt, 1990) and from impaired populations, including people with aphasia as a consequence of stroke (e.g., Hashimoto & Thompson, 2010) or neurodegenerative disease (e.g., Thompson et al, 2012). In this paradigm, speakers name pictures while trying to ignore spoken or written distractor words.…”