Boone D R, Friedman H M
J Speech Hear Disord. 1976 Nov;41(4):523-9. doi: 10.1044/jshd.4104.523.
Reading and writing performance was observed in 30 adult aphasic patients to determine whether there was a significant difference when stimuli and manual responses were varied in the written form: cursive versus manuscript. Patients were asked to read aloud 10 words written cursively and 10 words written in manuscript form. They were then asked to write on dictation 10 words responses using cursive writing and 10 words using manuscript writing. Number of words correctly read, number of words correctly written, and number of letters correctly written in the proper sequence were tallied for both cursive and manuscript writing tasks for each patient. Results indicated no significant difference in correct response between cursive and manuscript writing style for these aphasic patients as a group; however, it was noted that individual patients varied widely in their success using one writing form over the other. It appeared that since neither writing form showed better facilitation of performance, the writing style used should be determined according to the individual patient's own preference and best performance.
对30名成年失语症患者的阅读和书写表现进行了观察，以确定当书面形式的刺激和手动反应有所不同时，即草书与手写体之间是否存在显著差异。要求患者大声朗读10个用草书写的单词和10个用手写体写的单词。然后要求他们听写，用草书写出10个单词的回答，用手写体写出10个单词的回答。统计每位患者在草书和手写体书写任务中正确读出的单词数量、正确写出的单词数量以及按正确顺序正确写出的字母数量。结果表明，作为一个群体，这些失语症患者在草书和手写体书写风格之间的正确反应上没有显著差异；然而，值得注意的是，个体患者在使用一种书写形式优于另一种书写形式方面的成功率差异很大。似乎由于两种书写形式都没有表现出对表现更好的促进作用，因此应根据个体患者自己的偏好和最佳表现来确定所使用的书写风格。
