ArticleJournal of neurolinguistics2018
Sentence Processing in Aphasia: An Examination of Material-Specific and General Cognitive Factors.
Article in Journal of neurolinguistics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computerized adaptation and validity evidence of the test of assessment of syntactic processing in comprehension (TASComp) in Brazilian adults.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- The effect of time on lexical and syntactic processing in aphasia.Journal of neurolinguistics · 2023Article
- Effects of Acquired Aphasia on the Recognition of Speech Under Energetic and Informational Masking Conditions.Trends in hearingArticle
- The Influence of Aphasia Type and Severity on Sentence Comprehension after Left Hemisphere Stroke.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to characterize further the nature of sentence processing deficits in acquired aphasia. Adults with aphasia and age-and education-matched adults with no brain damage completed a battery of formal cognitive-linguistic tests and an experimental sentence judgment task, which was performed alone and during focused attention and divided attention or dual-task conditions. The specific aims were to determine whether (a) increased extra-linguistic cognitive demands (i.e., focused and divided conditions) differentially affected the sentence judgement performances of the aphasic and control groups, (b) increased extra- linguistic cognitive demands interact with stimulus parameters (i.e., syntactic complexity, number of propositions) known to influence sentence processing, and (c) syntactic- or material specific resource limitations (e.g., sentence judgment in isolation), general cognitive abilities (e.g., short-term and working memory test scores), or both share a significant relationship with dual-task outcomes. Accuracy, grammatical sensitivity, and reaction time findings were consistent with resource models of aphasia and processing accounts of aphasic syntactic limitations, underscoring the theoretical and clinical importance of acknowledging and specifying the strength and nature of interactions between linguistic and extra-linguistic cognitive processes in not only individuals with aphasia, but also other patient and typical aging populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.