ArticleNeuropsychologia2019
Verb-argument integration in primary progressive aphasia: Real-time argument access and selection.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Verb Frequency and Density Drive Naming Performance in Primary Progressive Aphasia.Aphasiology · 2023Article
- Eye movements as a measure of word comprehension deficits in primary progressive aphasia.Brain and language · 2022Article
- Online sentence processing impairments in agrammatic and logopenic primary progressive aphasia: Evidence from ERP.Neuropsychologia · 2021Article
- Dissociation between frontal and temporal-parietal contributions to connected speech in acute stroke.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2020Article
- Thematic Integration Impairments in Primary Progressive Aphasia: Evidence From Eye-Tracking.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImpaired sentence comprehension is observed in the three major subtypes of PPA, with distinct performance patterns relating to impairments in comprehending complex sentences in the agrammatic (PPA-G) and logopenic (PPA-L) variants and word comprehension in the semantic subtype (PPA-S). However, little is known about basic combinatory processes during sentence comprehension in PPA, such the integration of verbs with their subject and object(s) (verb-argument integration).
methodsThe present study used visual-world eye-tracking to examine real-time verb-argument integration in individuals with PPA (12 with PPA-G, 10 with PPA-L, and 6 with PPA-S) and neurotypical older adults (15). Two baseline experiments probed eye movement control, using a non-linguistic task, and noun comprehension, respectively. Two verb-argument integration experiments examined the effects of verb meaning on (a) lexical access of the verb's direct object (argument access) and (b) selection of a semantically-appropriate direct object (argument selection), respectively. Eye movement analyses were conducted only for trials with correct behavioral responses, allowing us to distinguish accuracy and online processing.
resultsThe eye movement control experiment revealed no significant impairments in PPA, whereas the noun comprehension experiment revealed reduced accuracy and eye-movement latencies in PPA-S, and to a lesser extent PPA-G. In the argument access experiment, verb meaning facilitated argument access normally in PPA-G and PPA-L; in PPA-S, verb-meaning effects emerged on an atypical time course. In the argument selection experiment, significant impairments in accuracy were observed only in PPA-G, accompanied by markedly atypical eye movement patterns.
conclusionThis study revealed two distinct patterns of impaired verb-argument integration in PPA. In PPA-S, impaired verb-argument integration was observed in the argument access experiment, indicating impairments in basic semantic combinatory processes which likely relate to damage in ventral language pathways. In contrast, listeners with PPA-G showed marked impairments of argument selection, likely relating to damage to left inferior frontal regions.
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.