Appreciation of indirect requests by left- and right-brain-damaged patients: the effects of verbal context and conventionality of wording.

Unilaterally right (RHD)- and left (LHD)-hemisphere-damaged patients were tested on their ability to discern the correct, nonliteral interpretation of indirect requests (e.g., "Can you open the door?") embedded in short vignettes and presented without any pictorial support. Each stimulus vignette incorporated two verbal cues--context and conventionality of form--designed to influence interpretations of a critical utterance located at the end of each vignette. Contexts were biased to encourage either the direct, literal reading of critical utterances as a question, or the indirect meaning of the utterance as a request for action. The critical utterances themselves were either high in conventionality (e.g., "Can you ...?") which encouraged an indirect interpretation, or low in conventionality (e.g., "Is it possible for you to ...?") which encouraged a direct interpretation. Results indicated that RHD patients were significantly impaired, relative to controls, in their ability to make judgments based on contextual information. RHD patients performed comparably to the aphasic, LHD group in the use of both context and conventionality. These results replicate earlier findings of disrupted indirect request comprehension by RHD patients tested in pictorially supported paradigms.