Literature DB >> 7967574

Working memory and inference revision in brain-damaged and normally aging adults.

C A Tompkins1, C G Bloise, M L Timko, A Baumgaertner.   

Abstract

This study examined the association between estimated working memory (WM) capacity and comprehension of passages that required revision of an initial interpretation. Predictions stemmed from the recently elaborated theory of capacity-constrained comprehension (Just & Carpenter, 1992, Psychological Review, 99, 122-149), which includes as a major feature the principle that WM influences comprehension only as processing demands approach or exceed the limits of capacity. As anticipated from task analysis, correlations between unilaterally brain-damaged patients' estimated WM capacity and discourse comprehension performance were minimal for nondemanding measures, and increased in magnitude with task processing requirements. Most notably, a meaningful correlation (/r/ greater than .50) emerged only for the task judged to involve the most demanding comprehension processes, for adults with right hemisphere brain damage. No meaningful associations between estimated WM capacity and task performance were observed for normally aging subjects, who were not expected to have difficulty with any of our comprehension measures. The nature of WM deficits in brain-damaged adults (total capacity, vs. resource allocation, vs. slow or otherwise faulty component processing operations) is considered, and some existing work is interpreted from a cognitive resource perspective. Theoretical implications and clinical applicability of the working memory/resource framework are also discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7967574     DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3704.896

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Hear Res        ISSN: 0022-4685


  30 in total

1.  ERP and behavioral evidence of individual differences in metaphor comprehension.

Authors:  Victoria A Kazmerski; Dawn G Blasko; Banchiamlack G Dessalegn
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-07

2.  Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  M Daneman; P M Merikle
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1996-12

3.  Theoretical Considerations for Understanding "Understanding" by Adults With Right Hemisphere Brain Damage.

Authors:  Connie A Tompkins
Journal:  Perspect Neurophysiol Neurogenic Speech Lang Disord       Date:  2008-06-01

4.  Misleading Bias-Driven Expectations in Referential Processing and the Facilitative Role of Contrastive Accent.

Authors:  Inbal Itzhak; Shari R Baum
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2015-10

5.  Investigating the origin of nonfluency in aphasia: A path modeling approach to neuropsychology.

Authors:  Nazbanou Nozari; Yasmeen Faroqi-Shah
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 4.027

6.  Activation and maintenance of peripheral semantic features of unambiguous words after right hemisphere brain damage in adults.

Authors:  Connie A Tompkins; Wiltrud Fassbinder; Victoria L Scharp; Kimberly M Meigh
Journal:  Aphasiology       Date:  2008-02-01       Impact factor: 2.773

7.  Can high-level inferencing be predicted by Discourse Comprehension Test performance in adults with right hemisphere brain damage?

Authors:  Connie A Tompkins; Kimberly Meigh; April Gibbs Scott; Lisa Guttentag Lederer
Journal:  Aphasiology       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 2.773

8.  Implicit and explicit learning in individuals with agrammatic aphasia.

Authors:  Julia Schuchard; Cynthia K Thompson
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2014-06

9.  A different story on "Theory of Mind" deficit in adults with right hemisphere brain damage.

Authors:  Connie A Tompkins; Victoria L Scharp; Wiltrud Fassbinder; Kimberly M Meigh; Elizabeth M Armstrong
Journal:  Aphasiology       Date:  2008-01-01       Impact factor: 2.773

10.  Imageability effects on sentence judgement by right-brain-damaged adults.

Authors:  Lisa Guttentag Lederer; April Gibbs Scott; Connie A Tompkins; Michael W Dickey
Journal:  Aphasiology       Date:  2009-03-01       Impact factor: 2.773

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.