When task demands induce “asyntactic” comprehension: A study of sentence interpretation in aphasia

Cupples, Linda; Inglis, A. L.

doi:10.1080/02643299308253461

Cited by 45 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to the difficulties in developing tasks and materials, several studies have shown that patient performance can vary tremendously on different tasks that presumably tap the same knowledge. For example, Cupples and Inglis (1993) demonstrated that a patient who showed a syntactic comprehension deficit on sentence-picture matching showed excellent performance on the same sentence types for actor identification. A more recent study by Inglis (2003) showed that patient performance could be influenced by problem-solving abilities.…”

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

The neuropsychology of sentence processing: Where do we stand?

Martin

2006

Cognitive Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the early 1980s, sentence comprehension deficits were attributed to a loss of syntactic knowledge in agrammatic Broca's aphasics and to a short-term memory deficit in conduction aphasics. Findings in the remainder of the decade called both of these claims into question and presented general difficulties for the group study approach. Results from case studies support the representational independence of syntactic and semantic information but the interaction of these knowledge sources during processing. Working memory is still considered to provide critical constraints on sentence comprehension, but the capacity involved appears to be largely independent of the phonological storage involved in word list recall. Current computational approaches to sentence comprehension provide the means of accounting for the interaction of multiple sources of information and working memory requirements, but have yet to be tested against neuropsychological findings.

show abstract

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

The neuropsychology of sentence processing: Where do we stand?

Martin

2006

Cognitive Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the VBM analyses controlled for accuracy in type 1 (simple reversible sentences) and partly discount this possibility. In addition, it might be possible that the type of task used (i.e., off-line task), more than sentence complexity, required high vWM demand (Cupples and Inglis, 1993;Rochon et al, 1994;Waters and Caplan, 1997). Finally, a possible confound is that the nonbasic sentences (type 2 and 3) were not matched for length, number of words, and stimulus duration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anatomical Correlates of Sentence Comprehension and Verbal Working Memory in Neurodegenerative Disease

Amici¹,

Brambati²,

Wilkins³

et al. 2007

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates whether sentence comprehension and nonsyntactic verbal working memory (vWM) are sustained by the same or by different neural systems. Scores in a sentence-picture matching task and in digits backward (DB) were correlated with magnetic resonance imaging voxelwise gray matter volumes using voxel-based morphometry in 58 patients with neurodegenerative diseases. Results showed that overall sentence comprehension scores, regardless of grammatical structure, correlated with gray matter volumes in the left temporoparietal region, whereas DB scores correlated with dorsolateral prefrontal and inferior parietal volumes. Comprehension of multiclausal relative sentences (type 3) significantly correlated with voxels in the dorsal portion of the left inferior and middle frontal gyri. When DB and multiclausal relative sentences were directly compared, they showed overlapping neural substrates in the dorsolateral left frontal region, supporting a single source of vWM for syntactic and nonsyntactic tasks. Within this large area of common involvement, a small portion of pars triangularis showed an independent effect of multiclausal sentences, whereas a region in the middle frontal gyrus showed greater correlation with DB. This study reconciles two opposing views, which hold that sentence comprehension and vWM rely on either the same or different anatomical resources.

show abstract

“…One limitation of the task is that it only tests what is pictureable. Another limitation is that it involves a number of cognitive processes and does not tap into language processing abilities in a straightforward way (Cupples & Inglis, 1993). We therefore turn to tasks that are less restricted and that have fewer extralinguistic demands to test in more detail the nature of syntactic and semantic representations in JG.…”

Section: Birkbeck Reversible Sentence Comprehension Testmentioning

confidence: 99%