Contextual bias and predictive inferencing in adults with and without right hemisphere brain damage

Aphasiology

Volumn 19, Issue 3-5, 2005, Pages 423-434

  Blake, Margaret Lehman ^a   Lesniewicz, Kimberly S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BRAIN INJURY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COGNITION; COGNITIVE DEFECT; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE DISABILITY; MALE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTION; PROBABILITY; RIGHT HEMISPHERE; SELF CONCEPT; WORKING MEMORY;

EID: 19144365623     PISSN: 02687038     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02687030444000868     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Beeman, M. (1993). Semantic processing in the right hemisphere may contribute to drawing inferences from discourse. Brain and Language, 44, 80-120.
2. Benowitz, L. I., Moya, K. L., & Levine, D. N. (1990). Impaired verbal reasoning and constructional apraxia in subjects with right hemisphere damage. Neuropsychologia, 28, 231-241.
3. Brookshire, R. H., & Nicholas, L. E. (1993). Discourse Comprehension Test. Tucson, AZ: Communication Skill Builders.
4. Brownell, H. H., Potter, H. H., Bihrle, A. M., & Gardner, H. (1986). Inference deficits in right brain-damaged patients. Brain and Language, 27, 310-321.
5. Burns, M. S. (1997). Burns Brief Inventory of Communication and Cognition. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
6. Calvo, M. G. (2000). The time course of predictive inferences depends on contextual constraints. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 293-319.
7. Cherney, L. R., & Halper, A. S. (2001). Unilateral visual neglect in right-hemisphere stroke: A longitudinal study. Brain Injury, 15, 585-592.
8. Crum, R. M., Anthony, J. C., Bassett, S. S., & Folstein, M. F. (1993). Population-based norms for the Mini-Mental State Examination by age and education level. JAMA, The Journal of the American Medical Association, 269, 2386-2392.
9. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (2000). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
10. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215-251.
11. Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini Mental State. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189-198.
12. Garrod, S. C., O'Brien, E. J., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1990). Elaborative inferencing as an active or passive process. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 250-257.
13. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371-395.
14. Hough, M. S. (1990). Narrative comprehension in adults with right and left hemisphere brain damage: Theme organization. Brain and Language, 38, 253-277.
15. Klin, C. M, Guzman, A. E., & Levine, W. H. (1999a). Prevalence and persistence of predictive inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 593-604.
16. Klin, C. M., Murray, J. D., Levine, W. H., & Guzman, A. E. (1999b). Forward inferences: From activation to long-term memory. Discourse Processes, 27, 241-260.
17. Lehman, M. T., & Tompkins, C. A. (1998). Reliability and validity of an auditory working memory measure: Data from elderly and right-hemisphere damaged adults. Aphasiology, 12, 771-785.
18. Lehman, M. T., & Tompkins, C. A. (2000). Inferencing in adults with right hemisphere brain damage: An analysis of conflicting results. Aphasiology, 14, 485-499.
19. Lehman-Blake, M. T., & Tompkins, C. A. (2001). Predictive inferencing in adults with right hemisphere brain damage. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 44, 639-654.
20. Leonard, C. L., Waters, G. S., & Caplan, D. (1997a). The use of contextual information by right brain damaged individuals in the resolution of ambiguous pronouns. Brain and Language, 57, 309-342.
21. Leonard, C. L., Waters, G. S., & Caplan, D. (1997b). The use of contextual information related to general world knowledge by right-brain damaged individuals in pronoun resolution. Brain and Language, 57, 343-359.
22. McDonald, S., & Wales, R. (1986). An investigation of the ability to process inferences in language following right hemisphere brain damage. Brain and Language, 29, 68-80.
23. McKoon, G., & Ratcliff R. (1989). Assessing the occurrence of elaborative inference with recognition: Compatibility checking vs. compound cue theory. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 547-563.
24. McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99, 440-466.
25. Myers, P. S. (1999). Right hemisphere disorder: Disorders of communication and cognition. San Diego, CA: Singular.
26. Myers, P. S., & Brookshire, R. H. (1986). The effect of visual and inferential variables on scene descriptions of right-hemisphere-damaged and non-brain-damaged adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 870-880.
27. Olson, G. M., Duffy, S. A., & Mack, R. L. (1984). Thinking-out-loud as a method for studying real-time comprehension processes. In D. E. Kieras & M. A. Just (Eds.), New methods in reading comprehension research (pp. 253-286). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
28. Ostrove, J. M., Simpson, T., & Gardner, H. (1990). Beyond scripts: A note on the capacity of right hemisphere-damaged patients to process social and emotional content. Brain and Cognition, 12, 144-154.
29. Rehak, A., Kaplan, J. A., Weylman, S. T., Kelly, B., Brownell, H. H., & Gardner, H. (1992). Story processing in right-hemisphere brain-damaged patients. Brain and Language, 42, 320-336.
30. Rivers, D. L., & Love, R. J. (1980). Language performance on visual processing tasks in right hemisphere lesion cases. Brain and Language, 10, 348-366.
31. Swinney, D. A. (1991). The resolution of indeterminacy during language comprehension: Perspectives on modularity in lexical, structural and pragmatic process. In G. B. Simpson (Ed.), Understanding word and sentence. North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers.
32. Tompkins, C. A. (1995). Right hemisphere communication disorders: Theory and management. San Diego, CA: Singular.
33. Tompkins, C. A., & Baumgaertner, A. (1998). Clinical value of online measures for adults with right hemisphere brain damage. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 7, 68-74.
34. Tompkins, C. A., Baumgaertner, A., Lehman, M. T., & Fassbinder, W. (2000). Mechanisms of discourse comprehension impairment after right hemisphere brain damage: Suppression and enhancement in lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 43, 62-78.
35. Tompkins, C. A., Bloise, C. G. R., Timko, M. L., & Baumgaertner, A. (1994). Working memory and inference revision in brain-damaged and normally aging adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 896-912.
36. Tompkins, C. A., Lehman-Blake, M. T., Baumgaertner, A., & Fassbinder, W. (2001). Mechanisms of discourse comprehension impairment after right hemisphere brain damage: Suppression in inferential ambiguity resolution. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 44, 400-415.
37. Tompkins, C. A., Lehman-Blake, M., Baumgaertner, A., & Fassbinder, W. (2002). Characterizing comprehension difficulties after right brain damage: Attentional demands of suppression function. Aphasiology, 16, 559-572.
38. van den Broek, P., Lorch, R. F., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers' goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory & Cognition, 29, 1081-1087.
39. Wapner, W., Hamby, S., & Gardner, H. (1981). The role of the right hemisphere in the apprehension of complex linguistic materials. Brain and Language, 14, 15-33.
40. Whitney, P., Ritchie, B. G., & Clark, M. B. (1991). Working-memory capacity and the use of elaborative inferences in text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 14, 133-145.
41. Wilson, B., Cockburn, J., & Halligan, P. (1987). Behavioural Inattention Test. Bury St. Edmonds, UK: Thames Valley Test Co.