Can high-level inferencing be predicted by Discourse Comprehension Test performance in adults with right hemisphere brain damage?

Aphasiology

Volumn 23, Issue 7-8, 2009, Pages 1016-1027

  Tompkins, Connie A ^a   Meigh, Kimberly ^a   Scott, April Gibbs ^a   Lederer, Lisa Guttentag ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

High level inferencing; Right brain damage

Indexed keywords

EID: 77950763462     PISSN: 02687038     EISSN: 14645041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02687030802588858     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Bayles, K. A., & Tomoeda, C. K. (1993). Arizona Battery for Communication Disorders of Dementia. Tucson, AZ: Canyonlands Publishing.
2. Beeman, M. (1993). Semantic processing in the right hemisphere may contribute to drawing inferences from discourse. Brain and Language, 44, 80-120.
3. Benton, A. L., Hamsher, K. D., Varney, N. R., & Spreen, O. (1983). Judgment of line orientation. In Contributions to neuropsychological assessment (pp. 44-54). New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Benton, A. L., Sivan, A. B., Hamsher, K. D., Varney, N. R., & Spreen, O. (1983). Visual form discrimination. In Contributions to neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Brookshire, R. H., & Nicholas, L. E. (1993). Discourse Comprehension Test. Tucson, AZ: Communication Skill Builders.
6. Brownell, H., & Friedman, O. (2001). Discourse ability in patients with unilateral left and right hemisphere brain damage. In R. S. Berndt (Ed.), Handbook of neuropsychology, Vol. 3: Language and aphasia (pp. 189-203). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
7. Brownell, H. H., & Martino, G. (1998). Deficits in inference and social cognition: The effects of right hemisphere brain damage on discourse. In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 309-328). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
8. Brownell, H. H., Potter, H. H., Bihrle, A. M., & Gardner, H. (1986). Inference deficits in right braindamaged patients. Brain and Language, 27, 310-321.
9. Caplan, D. (1987). Discrimination of normal and aphasic subjects on a test of syntactic comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 25, 173-184.
10. Carroll, J. B., Davies, P., & Richman, B. (1971). Word frequency book. New York: American Heritage.
11. Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
12. Fang, I. E. (1966). The easy listening formula. Journal of Broadcasting, 11, 63-68.
13. Ferstl, E. (2007). The functional neuroanatomy of text comprehension: What's the story so far? In F. Schmalhofer & C. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes (pp. 53-102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
14. Happe, F., Brownell, H., & Winner, E. (1999). Acquired 'theory of mind' impairments following stroke. Cognition, 70, 211-240.
15. Harford, E. R., & Dodds, E. (1982). Hearing status of ambulatory senior citizens. Ear & Hearing, 3(3), 105-109.
16. Joanette, Y., Goulet, P., & Hannequin, D. (1990). Right hemisphere and verbal communication. New York: Springer-Verlag.
17. Lehman, M. T., & Tompkins, C. A. (2000). Inferencing in adults with right hemisphere brain damage: An analysis of conflicting results. Aphasiology, 14, 485-499.
18. Molloy, R., Brownell, H. H., & Gardner, H. (1990). Discourse comprehension by right-hemisphere stroke patients: Deficits of prediction and revision. In Y. Joanette & H. H. Brownell (Eds.), Discourse ability and brain damage. New York: Springer-Verlag.
19. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
20. Tompkins, C. A. (1995). Right hemisphere communication disorders: Theory and management. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing.
21. Tompkins, C. A., Baumgaertner, A., Lehman, M. T., & Fassbinder, W. (2000). Mechanisms of discourse comprehension impairment after right hemisphere brain damage: Suppression in lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 62-78.
22. 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.
23. Tompkins, C. A., Fassbinder, W., Lehman-Blake, M. T., & Baumgaertner, A. (2002). The nature and implications of right hemisphere language disorders: Issues in search of answers. In A. E. Hillis (Ed.), Handbook of adult language disorders: Integrating cognitive neuropsychology, neurology, and rehabilitation (pp. 429-449). New York: Psychology Press.
24. Tompkins, C. A., Fassbinder, W., Scharp, V. L., & Meigh, K. M. (2008a). Activation and maintenance of peripheral semantic features of unambiguous words after right hemisphere brain damage in adults. Aphasiology, 22, 119-138.
25. Tompkins, C. A., Scharp, V. L., Fassbinder, W., Meigh, K. M., & Armstrong, E. M. (2008b). A different story on "theory of mind" deficit in adults with right hemisphere brain damage. Aphasiology, 22, 1-20.
26. Tompkins, C. A., Scharp, V. L., Meigh, K. M., & Fassbinder, W. (2008c). Coarse coding and discourse comprehension in adults with right hemisphere brain damage. Aphasiology, 22, 204-223.
27. Tuiman, J. (1974). Determining the passage dependency of comprehension test questions in five major tests. Reading Research Quarterly, 2, 206-223.
28. Wilson, B., Cockburn, J., & Halligan, P. (1987). Behavioural Inattention Test. Windsor, UK: Thames Valley Test Company.
29. Winner, E., Brownell, H., Happe, F., Blum, A., & Pincus, D. (1998). Distinguishing lies from jokes: Theory of mind deficits and discourse interpretation in right hemisphere brain-damaged patients. Brain & Language, 62(1), 89-106.
30. Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162-185.