ArticleNeuropsychologia2021
Online sentence processing impairments in agrammatic and logopenic primary progressive aphasia: Evidence from ERP.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuropathology-specific language features in primary progressive aphasia.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Emotional valence, cloze probability, and entropy: Completion norms for 403 French sentences.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Language assessment in primary progressive aphasia: Which components should be tested?PloS one · 2025Article
- Online Eye Tracking for Aphasia: A Feasibility Study Comparing Web and Lab Tracking and Implications for Clinical Use.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
- Discriminating nonfluent/agrammatic and logopenic PPA variants with automatically extracted morphosyntactic measures from connected speech.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2024Article
- Examining cortical tracking of the speech envelope in post-stroke aphasia.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Musical and linguistic syntactic processing in agrammatic aphasia: An ERP study.Journal of neurolinguistics · 2022Article
- Effects of dual-task training in patients with post-stroke cognitive impairment: A randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Sentence Comprehension in Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Study of the Application of the Brazilian Version of the Test for the Reception of Grammar (TROG2-Br).Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Dissociating nouns and verbs in temporal and perisylvian networks: Evidence from neurodegenerative diseases.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2021Article
- What Language Disorders Reveal About the Mechanisms of Morphological Processing.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evidence from psycholinguistic research indicates that sentence processing is impaired in Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA), and more so in individuals with agrammatic (PPA-G) than logopenic (PPA-L) subtypes. Studies have mostly focused on offline sentence production ability, reporting impaired production of verb morphology (e.g., tense, agreement) and verb-argument structure (VAS) in PPA-G, and mixed findings in PPA-L. However, little is known about real-time sentence comprehension in PPA. The present study is the first to compare real-time semantic, morphosyntactic and VAS processing in individuals with PPA (10 with PPA-G and 9 with PPA-L), and in two groups of healthy (22 young and 19 older) individuals, using event-related potentials (ERP). Participants were instructed to listen to sentences that were either well-formed (n = 150) or contained a violation of semantics (e.g., *Owen was mentoring pumpkins at the party, n = 50), morphosyntax (e.g., *The actors was singing in the theatre, n = 50) or VAS (*Ryan was devouring on the couch, n = 50), and were required to perform a sentence acceptability judgment task while EEG was recorded. Results indicated that in the semantic task both healthy and PPA groups showed an N400 response to semantic violations, which was delayed in PPA and older (vs. younger) groups. Morphosyntactic violations elicited a P600 in both groups of healthy individuals and in PPA-L, but not in PPA-G. A similar P600 response was also found only in healthy individuals for VAS violations; whereas, abnormal ERP responses were observed in both PPA groups, with PPA-G showing no evidence of VAS violation detection and PPA-L showing a delayed and abnormally-distributed positive component that was negatively associated with offline sentence comprehension scores. These findings support characterizations of sentence processing impairments in PPA-G, by providing online evidence that VAS and morphosyntactic processing are impaired, in the face of substantially preserved semantic processing. In addition, the results indicate that on-line processing of VAS information may also be impaired in PPA-L, despite their near-normal accuracy on standardized language tests of argument structure production.
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.