Sentence comprehension disorders in aphasia: The concept of chance performance revisited
Sentence comprehension disorders in aphasia: The concept of chance performance revisited
复制标题
失语症的句子理解障碍：重新审视机会表现的概念
DOI：
10.1080/02687038.2012.730603
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Shravan Vasishth
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Frank Burchert;Sandra Hanne;Shravan Vasishth
背景：在失语症患者的句子理解行为测试中，正确和错误的反应往往是随机分布的。这种偶然表现的模式是Broca失语症的典型特征，但也可以在其他失语综合征中发现。许多研究者认为，机会行为是一种猜测策略的结果，这是在句子加工句法崩溃的情况下采用的。目的：利用最近使用视觉世界范式研究失语症在线句子理解的新证据，本文的目的是回顾作为句子加工句法障碍的反映的机会表现的概念，并重新审视将机会表现解释为猜测行为的传统解释。主要贡献：基于对视觉世界范式研究的最新证据的回顾，我们认为在失语症患者中，机会表现等于猜测的假设不一定与实际的分析过程兼容。我们假设在失语症的句子理解中存在两种不同的加工机制，从而重新解释了偶然性表现的概念。正确的响应始终是类似正常的解析机制的结果，即使在可能出现整体性能模式的情况下也是如此。另一方面，不正确的响应是解析器间歇性缺陷的结果。因此，失语症患者经常表现出的随机猜测行为并不一定反映出句子理解中的句法故障和在备选方案中的随机选择。相反，它应该被认为是正常理解程序中时间缺陷的结果。结论：我们的结论是，仅考虑行为离线数据可能不足以解释语言测试中的表现，并随后得出关于语言障碍的理论结论。相反，为了全面了解失语症患者的句法理解能力和可能的潜在缺陷，从在线研究中获得更多实时语言处理的数据是很重要的。
Background: In behavioural tests of sentence comprehension in aphasia, correct and incorrect responses are often randomly distributed. Such a pattern of chance performance is a typical trait of Broca's aphasia, but can be found in other aphasic syndromes as well. Many researchers have argued that chance behaviour is the result of a guessing strategy, which is adopted in the face of a syntactic breakdown in sentence processing.Aims: Capitalising on new evidence from recent studies investigating online sentence comprehension in aphasia using thevisual world paradigm, the aim of this paper is to review the concept of chance performance as a reflection of a syntactic impairment in sentence processing and to re-examine the conventional interpretation of chance performance as a guessing behaviour.Main Contribution: Based on a review of recent evidence from visual world paradigm studies, we argue that the assumption of chance performance equalling guessing is not necessarily compatible with actual real-time parsing procedures in people with aphasia. We propose a reinterpretation of the concept of chance performance by assuming that there are two distinct processing mechanisms underlying sentence comprehension in aphasia. Correct responses are always the result of normal-like parsing mechanisms, even in those cases where the overall performance pattern is at chance. Incorrect responses, on the other hand, are the result of intermittent deficiencies of the parser. Hence the random guessing behaviour that persons with aphasia often display does not necessarily reflect a syntactic breakdown in sentence comprehension and a random selection between alternatives. Instead it should be regarded as a result of temporal deficient parsing procedures in otherwise normal-like comprehension routines.Conclusion: Our conclusion is that the consideration of behavioural offline data alone may not be sufficient to interpret a performance in language tests and subsequently draw theoretical conclusions about language impairments. Rather it is important to call on additional data from online studies that look at language processing in real time in order to gain a comprehensive picture about syntactic comprehension abilities of people with aphasia and possible underlying deficits.