ORCID Profile
0000-0003-3197-3457
Current Organisations
Northwestern University
,
AXONIS Therapeutics, Inc.
,
University of Kansas
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-1999
Abstract: This study attempted to replicate the unusual wh question comprehension pattern of Hickok and Avrutin's (1996) subjects who showed an expected subject/object extraction asymmetry for which NP questions, but not for who questions. We also examined comprehension of what and which one questions, which are similar to who and which NP questions, respectively, and we examined passivized wh questions in order to test predictions of Grodzinsky's (1995) restrictive theory of trace deletion, the Trace-Based Account (TBA). Results, using both a figurine manipulation task and a picture pointing task, showed that only one of four agrammatic (Broca's) aphasic subjects showed the pattern reported by Hickok and Avrutin and that this pattern extended to comprehension of what and which one questions. One of the subjects showed subject/object asymmetry for all wh questions tested, as would be predicted by the original trace deletion hypothesis (Grodzinsky, 1984), and two subjects showed neither pattern. None of our subjects demonstrated ability to comprehend passivized wh questions as predicted by the TBA. We discuss our findings in terms of the lack of homogeneity of wh question comprehension among in iduals with agrammatic aphasia and we explore alternatives to the syntactic explanation for differences between who and which NP question comprehension advanced by Hickok and Avrutin.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 11-1998
DOI: 10.1017/S1355617798466141
Abstract: This study examined the postulate that training production of syntactically complex sentences results in generalization to less complex sentences that have processes in common with treated structures. Three agrammatic aphasic patients were trained to produce wh -movement structures, object clefts and/or object extracted who -questions, while generalization between these structures was tested. One NP-movement structure, passive sentences, also was tested for control purposes. Wh -movement occurs from the direct object position to specifier position in the complementizer phrase [SPEC, CP] for both wh -movement structures. In who -questions movement occurs in the matrix sentence, whereas, in object clefts movement occurs within an embedded relative clause, rendering them the most complex. Results showed robust generalization effects from object clefts to matrix who -question for 1 participant (D.L.) however, no generalization was noted from who -questions to object clefts for another (F.P.), and 1 participant (C.H.) showed acquisition of who -questions, but not object clefts, during the baseline condition without direct treatment. As expected, none of the participants showed improved production of passives. These findings supported those derived from our previous studies, indicating that generalization is enhanced not only when target structures are related along dimensions articulated by linguistic theory, but also when the direction of treatment is from more to less complex structures. The present findings also support proposals that projections of higher levels in the syntactic treatment are dependent on successful projection of lower levels. For our participants, training movement within CP in a lower (embedded) clause resulted in their ability to project to CP at higher levels. ( JINS , 1998, 4 , 661–674.)
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 02-2008
DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/020)
Abstract: In this article, the authors encapsulate discussions of the Language Work Group that took place as part of the Workshop in Plasticity/NeuroRehabilitation Research at the University of Florida in April 2005. In this narrative review, they define neuroplasticity and review studies that demonstrate neural changes associated with aphasia recovery and treatment. The authors then summarize basic science evidence from animals, human cognition, and computational neuroscience that is relevant to aphasia treatment research. They then turn to the aphasia treatment literature in which evidence exists to support several of the neuroscience principles. Despite the extant aphasia treatment literature, many questions remain regarding how neuroscience principles can be manipulated to maximize aphasia recovery and treatment. They propose a framework, incorporating some of these principles, that may serve as a potential roadmap for future investigations of aphasia treatment and recovery. In addition to translational investigations from basic to clinical science, the authors propose several areas in which translation can occur from clinical to basic science to contribute to the fundamental knowledge base of neurorehabilitation. This article is intended to reinvigorate interest in delineating the factors influencing successful recovery from aphasia through basic, translational, and clinical research.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2018
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2020
Location: United States of America
No related grants have been discovered for Cynthia K Thompson.