Typicality of Inanimate Category Exemplars in Aphasia Treatment: Further Evidence for Semantic Complexity
Typicality of Inanimate Category Exemplars in Aphasia Treatment: Further Evidence for Semantic Complexity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1044/1092-4388(2008/07-0038
复制
发表时间：
2008-12-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Kiran, Swathi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kiran, Swathi
目的：在2无生命的类别（家具和服装）使用单一主题的实验设计，在5名患者的行为与aphasia.Method：参与者接受了语义特征治疗，以提高命名的典型或非典型项目的语义类别内，而泛化进行了测试，未经训练的项目的类别内的典型性治疗方法，以提高命名。的典型性和类别训练的顺序是counterbalancedacross participants.Results：结果表明，2的4名患者训练命名的非典型的例子表现出泛化命名未经训练的典型例子。1例患者表现出泛化趋势，但未达到标准。此外，所有4名接受典型样本训练的患者均未对类别内未经训练的非典型样本进行概括性命名。此外，对错误的分析表明，治疗导致错误的演变，从与目标没有明显关系的错误到主要是语义和音素失语。结论：这些结果扩展了我们之前的发现（S. Kiran & C. K. Thompson，2003 a）用于非流利性失语症患者和无生命类别，如家具和衣服。此外，这些结果支持了这样一种说法，即训练非典型示例是一种比训练典型示例更有效的方法，可以促进对类别中未训练项目的泛化。Kiran，2007年）。
Purpose: The typicality treatment approach on improving naming was investigated within 2 inanimate categories ( furniture and clothing) using a single-subject experimental design across participants and behaviors in 5 patients with aphasia.Method: Participants received a semantic feature treatment to improve naming of either typical or atypical items within semantic categories, whereas generalization was tested to untrained items of the category. The order of typicality and category trained was counterbalanced across participants.Results: Results indicated that 2 out of 4 patients trained on naming of atypical examples demonstrated generalization to naming untrained typical examples. One patient showed trends toward generalization but did not achieve criterion. Furthermore, all 4 patients trained on typical examples demonstrated no generalized naming to untrained atypical examples within the category. Also, analysis of errors indicated an evolution of errors as a result of treatment, from those with no apparent relationship to the target to primarily semantic and phonemic paraphasias.Conclusion: These results extend our previous findings ( S. Kiran & C. K. Thompson, 2003a) to patients with nonfluent aphasia and to inanimate categories such as furniture and clothing. Additionally, the results provide support for the claim that training atypical examples is a more efficient method of facilitating generalization to untrained items within a category than training typical examples ( S. Kiran, 2007).