Apraxia of speech and the study of speech production impairments: Can we avoid further confusion? Reply to Romani (2021) COMMENT

被引:3
作者
Mailend, Marja-Liisa [1 ,2 ]
Maas, Edwin [3 ]
Story, Brad H. [4 ]
机构
[1] Einstein Healthcare Network, Moss Rehabil Res Inst, Elkins Pk, PA USA
[2] Univ Tartu, Dept Special Educ, Tartu, Estonia
[3] Temple Univ, Dept Commun Sci & Disorders, Philadelphia, PA 19122 USA
[4] Univ Arizona, Speech Language & Hearing Sci, Tucson, AZ USA
关键词
Apraxia of speech; clinical diagnosis; methodological approach; speech/language production; MOTOR ERRORS; APHASIA; TIME; PERFORMANCE; FREQUENCY; PATTERNS; SPOKEN; TOOL;
D O I
10.1080/02643294.2021.2009790
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
We agree with Cristina Romani (CR) about reducing confusion and agree that the issues raised in her commentary are central to the study of apraxia of speech (AOS). However, CR critiques our approach from the perspective of basic cognitive neuropsychology. This is confusing and misleading because, contrary to CR's claim, we did not attempt to inform models of typical speech production. Instead, we relied on such models to study the impairment in the clinical category of AOS (translational cognitive neuropsychology). Thus, the approach along with the underlying assumptions is different. This response aims to clarify these assumptions, broaden the discussion regarding the methodological approach, and address CR's concerns. We argue that our approach is well-suited to meet the goals of our recent studies and is commensurate with the current state of the science of AOS. Ultimately, a plurality of approaches is needed to understand a phenomenon as complex as AOS.
引用
收藏
页码:309 / 317
页数:9
相关论文
共 56 条