Cargando…

Recovery of Sentence Production Processes Following Language Treatment in Aphasia: Evidence from Eyetracking

Introduction: Sentence production impairments in aphasia often improve with treatment. However, little is known about how cognitive processes supporting sentence production, such as sentence planning, are impacted by treatment. Methods: The present study used eyetracking to examine changes in senten...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mack, Jennifer E., Nerantzini, Michaela, Thompson, Cynthia K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5346573/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28348524
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00101
_version_ 1782513903112028160
author Mack, Jennifer E.
Nerantzini, Michaela
Thompson, Cynthia K.
author_facet Mack, Jennifer E.
Nerantzini, Michaela
Thompson, Cynthia K.
author_sort Mack, Jennifer E.
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Sentence production impairments in aphasia often improve with treatment. However, little is known about how cognitive processes supporting sentence production, such as sentence planning, are impacted by treatment. Methods: The present study used eyetracking to examine changes in sentence production resulting from a 12-week language treatment program focused on passive sentences (Treatment of Underlying Forms (TUF); Thompson and Shapiro, 2005). In two pre-treatment and two post-treatment sessions, nine participants with mild-to-moderate agrammatic aphasia performed a structural priming task, which involved repeating primed sentences (actives or passives) and then, using the same verb, producing sentences describing pictured events. Two individuals with aphasia performed the eyetracking task on the same schedule without intervening language treatment. Ten unimpaired older adults also performed the task to identify normal performance patterns. Sentence production accuracy and speech onset latencies were examined, and eye movements to the pictured Agent and Theme characters were analyzed in the first 400 ms after picture onset, reflecting early sentence planning, and in the regions preceding the production of the sentence subject and post-verbal noun, reflecting lexical encoding. Results: Unimpaired controls performed with high accuracy. Their early eye movements (first 400 ms) indicated equal fixations to the Agent and Theme, consistent with structural sentence planning (i.e., initial construction of an abstract structural frame). Subsequent eye movements occurring prior to speech onset were consistent with encoding of the correct sentence subject (i.e., the Agent in actives, Theme in passives), with encoding of the post-verbal noun beginning at speech onset. In participants with aphasia, accuracy improved significantly with treatment, and post-treatment (but not pre-treatment) eye movements were qualitatively similar to those of unimpaired controls, indicating correct encoding of the Agent and Theme nouns for both active and passive sentences. Analysis of early eye movements also showed a treatment-induced increase in structural planning. No changes in sentence production accuracy or eye movements were found in the aphasic participants who did not receive treatment. Conclusion: These findings indicate that treatment improves sentence production and results in the emergence of normal-like cognitive processes associated with successful sentence production, including structural planning.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5346573
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53465732017-03-27 Recovery of Sentence Production Processes Following Language Treatment in Aphasia: Evidence from Eyetracking Mack, Jennifer E. Nerantzini, Michaela Thompson, Cynthia K. Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience Introduction: Sentence production impairments in aphasia often improve with treatment. However, little is known about how cognitive processes supporting sentence production, such as sentence planning, are impacted by treatment. Methods: The present study used eyetracking to examine changes in sentence production resulting from a 12-week language treatment program focused on passive sentences (Treatment of Underlying Forms (TUF); Thompson and Shapiro, 2005). In two pre-treatment and two post-treatment sessions, nine participants with mild-to-moderate agrammatic aphasia performed a structural priming task, which involved repeating primed sentences (actives or passives) and then, using the same verb, producing sentences describing pictured events. Two individuals with aphasia performed the eyetracking task on the same schedule without intervening language treatment. Ten unimpaired older adults also performed the task to identify normal performance patterns. Sentence production accuracy and speech onset latencies were examined, and eye movements to the pictured Agent and Theme characters were analyzed in the first 400 ms after picture onset, reflecting early sentence planning, and in the regions preceding the production of the sentence subject and post-verbal noun, reflecting lexical encoding. Results: Unimpaired controls performed with high accuracy. Their early eye movements (first 400 ms) indicated equal fixations to the Agent and Theme, consistent with structural sentence planning (i.e., initial construction of an abstract structural frame). Subsequent eye movements occurring prior to speech onset were consistent with encoding of the correct sentence subject (i.e., the Agent in actives, Theme in passives), with encoding of the post-verbal noun beginning at speech onset. In participants with aphasia, accuracy improved significantly with treatment, and post-treatment (but not pre-treatment) eye movements were qualitatively similar to those of unimpaired controls, indicating correct encoding of the Agent and Theme nouns for both active and passive sentences. Analysis of early eye movements also showed a treatment-induced increase in structural planning. No changes in sentence production accuracy or eye movements were found in the aphasic participants who did not receive treatment. Conclusion: These findings indicate that treatment improves sentence production and results in the emergence of normal-like cognitive processes associated with successful sentence production, including structural planning. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5346573/ /pubmed/28348524 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00101 Text en Copyright © 2017 Mack, Nerantzini and Thompson. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Mack, Jennifer E.
Nerantzini, Michaela
Thompson, Cynthia K.
Recovery of Sentence Production Processes Following Language Treatment in Aphasia: Evidence from Eyetracking
title Recovery of Sentence Production Processes Following Language Treatment in Aphasia: Evidence from Eyetracking
title_full Recovery of Sentence Production Processes Following Language Treatment in Aphasia: Evidence from Eyetracking
title_fullStr Recovery of Sentence Production Processes Following Language Treatment in Aphasia: Evidence from Eyetracking
title_full_unstemmed Recovery of Sentence Production Processes Following Language Treatment in Aphasia: Evidence from Eyetracking
title_short Recovery of Sentence Production Processes Following Language Treatment in Aphasia: Evidence from Eyetracking
title_sort recovery of sentence production processes following language treatment in aphasia: evidence from eyetracking
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5346573/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28348524
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00101
work_keys_str_mv AT mackjennifere recoveryofsentenceproductionprocessesfollowinglanguagetreatmentinaphasiaevidencefromeyetracking
AT nerantzinimichaela recoveryofsentenceproductionprocessesfollowinglanguagetreatmentinaphasiaevidencefromeyetracking
AT thompsoncynthiak recoveryofsentenceproductionprocessesfollowinglanguagetreatmentinaphasiaevidencefromeyetracking