Literature DB >> 21058076

Rasch models of aphasic performance on syntactic comprehension tests.

Roee Gutman1, Gayle DeDe, Jennifer Michaud, Jun S Liu, David Caplan.   

Abstract

Responses of 42 people with aphasia to 11 sentence types in enactment and sentence-picture matching tasks were characterized using Rasch models that varied in the inclusion of the factors of task, sentence type, and patient group. The best fitting models required the factors of task and patient group but not sentence type. The results provide evidence that aphasic syntactic comprehension is best accounted for by models that include different estimates of patient ability in different tasks and different difficulty of all sentences in different groups of patients, but that do not include different estimates of patient ability for different types of sentences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21058076      PMCID: PMC3057915          DOI: 10.1080/02643294.2010.512285

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol        ISSN: 0264-3294            Impact factor:   2.468


  14 in total

1.  AIC model selection using Akaike weights.

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Simon Farrell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-02

2.  Stochastic relaxation, gibbs distributions, and the bayesian restoration of images.

Authors:  S Geman; D Geman
Journal:  IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell       Date:  1984-06       Impact factor: 6.226

3.  Rasch modeling of revised token test performance: validity and sensitivity to change.

Authors:  William Hula; Patrick J Doyle; Malcolm R McNeil; Joseph M Mikolic
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Dissociation of algorithmic and heuristic processes in language comprehension: evidence from aphasia.

Authors:  A Caramazza; E B Zurif
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  1976-10       Impact factor: 2.381

5.  Determinants of sentence comprehension in aphasic patients in sentence-picture matching tasks.

Authors:  D Caplan; G S Waters; N Hildebrandt
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Comparison of morphology and syntax in free narrative and structured tests: fluent vs. nonfluent aphasics.

Authors:  H Goodglass; J A Christiansen; R Gallagher
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 4.027

7.  Sensitivity to grammatical structure in so-called agrammatic aphasics.

Authors:  M C Linebarger; M F Schwartz; E M Saffran
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1983-05

8.  Psych verb production and comprehension in agrammatic Broca's aphasia.

Authors:  Cynthia K Thompson; Miseon Lee
Journal:  J Neurolinguistics       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.710

9.  Complexity in treatment of syntactic deficits.

Authors:  Cynthia K Thompson; Lewis P Shapiro
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.408

10.  Real-time comprehension of wh- movement in aphasia: evidence from eyetracking while listening.

Authors:  Michael Walsh Dickey; JungWon Janet Choy; Cynthia K Thompson
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2006-07-17       Impact factor: 2.381

View more
  2 in total

1.  Cognitive Neuropsychology Has Been, Is, And Will Be Significant To Aphasiology.

Authors:  Matti Laine; Nadine Martin
Journal:  Aphasiology       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 2.773

2.  Dissociations and associations of performance in syntactic comprehension in aphasia and their implications for the nature of aphasic deficits.

Authors:  David Caplan; Jennifer Michaud; Rebecca Hufford
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2013-09-21       Impact factor: 2.381

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.