TY - JOUR
T1 - Target/error overlap in jargonaphasia
T2 - the case for a one-source model, lexical and non-lexical summation, and the special status of correct responses
AU - Olson, Andrew
AU - Halloran, Elizabeth
AU - Romani, Cristina
PY - 2015/12
Y1 - 2015/12
N2 - We present three jargonaphasic patients who made phonological errors in naming, repetition and reading. We analyse target/response overlap using statistical models to answer three questions: 1) Is there a single phonological source for errors or two sources, one for target-related errors and a separate source for abstruse errors? 2) Can correct responses be predicted by the same distribution used to predict errors or do they show a completion boost (CB)? 3) Is non-lexical and lexical information summed during reading and repetition? The answers were clear. 1) Abstruse errors did not require a separate distribution created by failure to access word forms. Abstruse and target-related errors were the endpoints of a single overlap distribution. 2) Correct responses required a special factor, e.g., a CB or lexical/phonological feedback, to preserve their integrity. 3) Reading and repetition required separate lexical and non-lexical contributions that were combined at output.
AB - We present three jargonaphasic patients who made phonological errors in naming, repetition and reading. We analyse target/response overlap using statistical models to answer three questions: 1) Is there a single phonological source for errors or two sources, one for target-related errors and a separate source for abstruse errors? 2) Can correct responses be predicted by the same distribution used to predict errors or do they show a completion boost (CB)? 3) Is non-lexical and lexical information summed during reading and repetition? The answers were clear. 1) Abstruse errors did not require a separate distribution created by failure to access word forms. Abstruse and target-related errors were the endpoints of a single overlap distribution. 2) Correct responses required a special factor, e.g., a CB or lexical/phonological feedback, to preserve their integrity. 3) Reading and repetition required separate lexical and non-lexical contributions that were combined at output.
KW - aphasia
KW - computational models
KW - jargonaphasia
KW - speech production
KW - summation hypothesis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84943235302&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.028
DO - 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.028
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84943235302
SN - 0010-9452
VL - 73
SP - 158
EP - 179
JO - Cortex
JF - Cortex
ER -