Typicality of Inanimate Category Exemplars in Aphasia Treatment: Further Evidence for Semantic Complexity

被引:57
作者
Kiran, Swathi [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Austin, Dept Commun Sci & Disorders, Austin, TX 78712 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF SPEECH LANGUAGE AND HEARING RESEARCH | 2008年 / 51卷 / 06期
关键词
aphasia; treatment; typicality;
D O I
10.1044/1092-4388(2008/07-0038)
中图分类号
R36 [病理学]; R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100104 ; 100213 ;
摘要
Purpose: The typicality treatment approach on improving naming was investigated within 2 inanimate categories ( furniture and clothing) using a single-subject experimental design across participants and behaviors in 5 patients with aphasia. Method: Participants received a semantic feature treatment to improve naming of either typical or atypical items within semantic categories, whereas generalization was tested to untrained items of the category. The order of typicality and category trained was counterbalanced across participants. Results: Results indicated that 2 out of 4 patients trained on naming of atypical examples demonstrated generalization to naming untrained typical examples. One patient showed trends toward generalization but did not achieve criterion. Furthermore, all 4 patients trained on typical examples demonstrated no generalized naming to untrained atypical examples within the category. Also, analysis of errors indicated an evolution of errors as a result of treatment, from those with no apparent relationship to the target to primarily semantic and phonemic paraphasias. Conclusion: These results extend our previous findings ( S. Kiran & C. K. Thompson, 2003a) to patients with nonfluent aphasia and to inanimate categories such as furniture and clothing. Additionally, the results provide support for the claim that training atypical examples is a more efficient method of facilitating generalization to untrained items within a category than training typical examples ( S. Kiran, 2007).
引用
收藏
页码:1550 / 1568
页数:19
相关论文
共 68 条
[1]   Why are different features central for natural kinds and artifacts?: the role of causal status in determining feature centrality [J].
Ahn, WK .
COGNITION, 1998, 69 (02) :135-178
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1983, BOSTON NAMING TEST
[3]  
[Anonymous], NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL R, DOI 10.1080/09602019108401387
[4]   CATEGORY REPRESENTATIONS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR CATEGORY STRUCTURE [J].
BARR, RA ;
CAPLAN, LJ .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 1987, 15 (05) :397-418
[5]   Evolution of oral and written confrontation naming errors in aphasia. A retrospective study on vascular patients [J].
Basso, A ;
Corno, M ;
Marangolo, P .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 1996, 18 (01) :77-87
[6]   Evaluating single-subject treatment research: Lessons learned from the aphasia literature [J].
Beeson, Pelagie M. ;
Robey, Randall R. .
NEUROPSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2006, 16 (04) :161-169
[8]  
Boyle M., 1995, AM J SPEECH-LANG PAT, V4, P94, DOI [DOI 10.1044/1058-0360.0404.94, 10.1044/1058-0360.0404.94]
[9]  
BUSK PL, 1992, SINGLE CASE RES DESI, P23
[10]  
Butterworth B., 1989, LEXICAL REPRESENTATI, P108