Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, Elkins Park, PA, USA.
Cortex. 2017 Aug;93:79-91. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.05.008. Epub 2017 May 25.
This study examined the timing of spontaneous self-monitoring in the naming responses of people with aphasia. Twelve people with aphasia completed a 615-item naming test twice, in separate sessions. Naming attempts were scored for accuracy and error type, and verbalizations indicating detection were coded as negation (e.g., "no, not that") or repair attempts (i.e., a changed naming attempt). Focusing on phonological and semantic errors, we measured the timing of the errors and of the utterances that provided evidence of detection. The effects of error type and detection response type on error-to-detection latencies were analyzed using mixed-effects regression modeling. We first asked whether phonological errors and semantic errors differed in the timing of the detection process or repair planning. Results suggested that the two error types primarily differed with respect to repair planning. Specifically, repair attempts for phonological errors were initiated more quickly than repair attempts for semantic errors. We next asked whether this difference between the error types could be attributed to the tendency for phonological errors to have a high degree of phonological similarity with the subsequent repair attempts, thereby speeding the programming of the repairs. Results showed that greater phonological similarity between the error and the repair was associated with faster repair times for both error types, providing evidence of error-to-repair priming in spontaneous self-monitoring. When controlling for phonological overlap, significant effects of error type and repair accuracy on repair times were also found. These effects indicated that correct repairs of phonological errors were initiated particularly quickly, whereas repairs of semantic errors were initiated relatively slowly, regardless of their accuracy. We discuss the implications of these findings for theoretical accounts of self-monitoring and the role of speech error repair in learning.
本研究考察了失语症患者命名反应中自发自我监测的时间。12 名失语症患者在两次单独的会议中完成了 615 项命名测试。命名尝试的准确性和错误类型进行了评分,并对表明检测的口头表述进行了编码,分为否定(例如,“不,不是那个”)或修复尝试(即改变的命名尝试)。本研究重点关注语音和语义错误,测量了错误和提供检测证据的话语的时间。使用混合效应回归模型分析了错误类型和检测响应类型对错误到检测延迟的影响。我们首先询问了语音错误和语义错误在检测过程或修复计划中的时间上是否存在差异。结果表明,这两种错误类型主要在修复计划上有所不同。具体来说,语音错误的修复尝试比语义错误的修复尝试更快地开始。我们接着询问了这种错误类型之间的差异是否可以归因于语音错误与后续修复尝试之间具有高度语音相似性的倾向,从而加速了修复的编程。结果表明,错误和修复之间的语音相似性越大,两种错误类型的修复时间都越快,这为自发自我监测中的错误到修复的启动提供了证据。当控制语音重叠时,还发现错误类型和修复准确性对修复时间的显著影响。这些结果表明,语音错误的正确修复特别快地开始,而语义错误的修复则相对较慢,无论其准确性如何。我们讨论了这些发现对自我监测的理论解释和言语错误修复在学习中的作用的影响。