scholarly journals Phonological Neighborhood Effects in Spoken Word Production in Aphasia

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 148-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasha Bullock-Rest ◽  
Alissa Cerny ◽  
Carol Sweeney ◽  
Carole Palumbo ◽  
Kathleen Kurowski ◽  
...  
2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 593-603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dasun Peramunage ◽  
Sheila E. Blumstein ◽  
Emily B. Myers ◽  
Matthew Goldrick ◽  
Melissa Baese-Berk

The current study examined the neural systems underlying lexically conditioned phonetic variation in spoken word production. Participants were asked to read aloud singly presented words, which either had a voiced minimal pair (MP) neighbor (e.g., cape) or lacked a minimal pair (NMP) neighbor (e.g., cake). The voiced neighbor never appeared in the stimulus set. Behavioral results showed longer voice-onset time for MP target words, replicating earlier behavioral results [Baese-Berk, M., & Goldrick, M. Mechanisms of interaction in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 527–554, 2009]. fMRI results revealed reduced activation for MP words compared to NMP words in a network including left posterior superior temporal gyrus, the supramarginal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus, and precentral gyrus. These findings support cascade models of spoken word production and show that neural activation at the lexical level modulates activation in those brain regions involved in lexical selection, phonological planning, and, ultimately, motor plans for production. The facilitatory effects for words with MP neighbors suggest that competition effects reflect the overlap inherent in the phonological representation of the target word and its MP neighbor.


1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen M. Eberhard ◽  
Kathryn Bock ◽  
Zenzi Griffin

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-279
Author(s):  
Samuel J Hansen ◽  
Katie L McMahon ◽  
Greig I de Zubicaray

2015 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 767-780 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Hunting Pompon ◽  
Malcolm R. McNeil ◽  
Kristie A. Spencer ◽  
Diane L. Kendall

Purpose The integrity of selective attention in people with aphasia (PWA) is currently unknown. Selective attention is essential for everyday communication, and inhibition is an important part of selective attention. This study explored components of inhibition—both intentional and reactive inhibition—during spoken-word production in PWA and in controls who were neurologically healthy (HC). Intentional inhibition is the ability to suppress a response to interference, and reactive inhibition is the delayed reactivation of a previously suppressed item. Method Nineteen PWA and 20 age- and education-matched HC participated in a Stroop spoken-word production task. This task allowed the examination of intentional and reactive inhibition by evoking and comparing interference, facilitation, and negative priming effects in different contexts. Results Although both groups demonstrated intentional inhibition, PWA demonstrated significantly more interference effects. PWA demonstrated no significant facilitation effects. HC demonstrated significant reverse facilitation effects. Neither group showed significant evidence of reactive inhibition, though both groups showed similar individual variability. Conclusions These results underscore the challenge interference presents for PWA during spoken-word production, indicating diminished intentional inhibition. Although reactive inhibition was not different between PWA and HC, PWA showed difficulty integrating and adapting to contextual information during language tasks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document