Jodzio Krzysztof, Biechowska Daria, Leszniewska-Jodzio Barbara
Institute of Psychology at the University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2008 Sep;23(5):543-51. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2008.05.005. Epub 2008 Jun 24.
Several neuropsychological studies have shown that patients with brain damage may demonstrate selective category-specific deficits of auditory comprehension. The present paper reports on an investigation of aphasic patients' preserved ability to perform a semantic task on spoken words despite severe impairment in auditory comprehension, as shown by failure in matching spoken words to pictured objects. Twenty-six aphasic patients (11 women and 15 men) with impaired speech comprehension due to a left-hemisphere ischaemic stroke were examined; all were right-handed and native speakers of Polish. Six narrowly defined semantic categories for which dissociations have been reported are colors, body parts, animals, food, objects (mostly tools), and means of transportation. An analysis using one-way ANOVA with repeated measures in conjunction with the Lambda-Wilks Test revealed significant discrepancies among these categories in aphasic patients, who had much more difficulty comprehending names of colors than they did comprehending names of other objects (F((5,21))=13.15; p<.001). Animals were most often the easiest category to understand. The possibility of a simple explanation in terms of word frequency and/or visual complexity was ruled out. Evidence from the present study support the position that so called "global" aphasia is an imprecise term and should be redefined. These results are discussed within the connectionist and modular perspectives on category-specific deficits in aphasia.
多项神经心理学研究表明,脑损伤患者可能会表现出听觉理解方面的选择性类别特异性缺陷。本文报告了一项对失语症患者的调查,尽管他们在听觉理解方面存在严重障碍,如无法将口语单词与图片中的物体匹配,但他们仍保留了对口语单词执行语义任务的能力。研究对26名因左半球缺血性中风导致言语理解受损的失语症患者(11名女性和15名男性)进行了检查;他们均为右利手,且母语为波兰语。已报告存在分离现象的六个狭义语义类别分别是颜色、身体部位、动物、食物、物体(主要是工具)和交通工具。使用重复测量的单向方差分析结合Lambda-Wilks检验进行的分析显示,失语症患者在这些类别之间存在显著差异,他们理解颜色名称的难度远高于理解其他物体名称的难度(F((5,21))=13.15;p<.001)。动物通常是最容易理解的类别。排除了用单词频率和/或视觉复杂性进行简单解释的可能性。本研究的证据支持这样一种观点,即所谓的“全球性”失语症是一个不精确的术语,应该重新定义。将在关于失语症中类别特异性缺陷的联结主义和模块化观点的背景下讨论这些结果。