Search

Despite the many mistakes we make while speaking, people can effectively communicate because we monitor our speech errors. However, the cognitive abilities and brain structures that support speech error monitoring are unclear. There may be different abilities and brain regions that support monitoring phonological speech errors versus monitoring semantic speech errors. We investigated speech, language, and cognitive control abilities that relate to detecting phonological and semantic speech errors in 41 individuals with aphasia who underwent detailed cognitive testing. Then, we used support vector regression lesion symptom mapping to identify brain regions supporting detection of phonological versus semantic errors in a group of 76 individuals with aphasia. The results revealed that motor speech deficits as well as lesions to the ventral motor cortex were related to reduced detection of phonological errors relative to semantic errors. Detection of semantic errors selectively related to auditory word comprehension deficits. Across all error types, poor cognitive control related to reduced detection. We conclude that monitoring of phonological and semantic errors relies on distinct cognitive abilities and brain regions. Furthermore, we identified cognitive control as a shared cognitive basis for monitoring all types of speech errors. These findings refine and expand our understanding of the neurocognitive basis of speech error monitoring., (© 2023 Massachusetts Institute of Technology.)

Many individuals with aphasia report the ability to say words in their heads despite spoken naming difficulty. Here, we examined individual differences in the experience of inner speech (IS) in participants with aphasia to test the hypotheses that self-reported IS reflects intact phonological retrieval and that articulatory output processing is not essential to IS. Participants (N = 53) reported their ability to name items correctly internally during a silent picture-naming task. We compared this measure of self-reported IS to spoken picture naming and a battery of tasks measuring the underlying processes required for naming (i.e., phonological retrieval and output processing). Results from three separate analyses of these measures indicate that self-reported IS relates to phonological retrieval and that speech output processes are not a necessary component of IS. We suggest that self-reported IS may be a clinically valuable measure that could assist in clinical decision-making regarding anomia diagnosis and treatment., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose Individuals with aphasia often report that they feel able to say words in their heads, regardless of speech output ability. Here, we examine whether these subjective reports of successful "inner speech" (IS) are meaningful and test the hypothesis that they reflect lexical retrieval. Method Participants were 53 individuals with chronic aphasia. During silent picture naming, participants reported whether or not they could say the name of each item inside their heads. Using the same items, they also completed 3 picture-based tasks that required phonological retrieval and 3 matched auditory tasks that did not. We compared participants' performance on these tasks for items they reported being able to say internally versus those they reported being unable to say internally. Then, we examined the relationship of psycholinguistic word features to self-reported IS and spoken naming accuracy. Results Twenty-six participants reported successful IS on nearly all items, so they could not be included in the item-level analyses. These individuals performed correspondingly better than the remaining participants on tasks requiring phonological retrieval, but not on most other language measures. In the remaining group ( n = 27), IS reports related item-wise to performance on tasks requiring phonological retrieval, but not to matched control tasks. Additionally, IS reports were related to 3 word characteristics associated with lexical retrieval, but not to articulatory complexity; spoken naming accuracy related to all 4 word characteristics. Six participants demonstrated evidence of unreliable IS reporting; compared with the group, they also detected fewer errors in their spoken responses and showed more severe language impairments overall. Conclusions Self-reported IS is meaningful in many individuals with aphasia and reflects lexical phonological retrieval. These findings have potential implications for treatment planning in aphasia and for our understanding of IS in the general population.

Many individuals with aphasia describe anomia with comments like "I know it but I can't say it." The exact meaning of such phrases is unclear. We hypothesize that at least two discrete experiences exist: the sense of (1) knowing a concept, but failing to find the right word, and (2) saying the correct word internally but not aloud (successful inner speech, sIS). We propose that sIS reflects successful lexical access; subsequent overt anomia indicates post-lexical output deficits. In this pilot study, we probed the subjective experience of anomia in 37 persons with aphasia. Self-reported sIS related to aphasia severity and phonological output deficits. In multivariate lesion-symptom mapping, sIS was associated with dorsal stream lesions, particularly in ventral sensorimotor cortex. These preliminary results suggest that people with aphasia can often provide meaningful insights about their experience of anomia and that reports of sIS relate to specific lesion locations and language deficits., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

People with aphasia frequently report being able to say a word correctly in their heads, even if they are unable to say that word aloud. It is difficult to know what is meant by these reports of "successful inner speech". We probe the experience of successful inner speech in two people with aphasia. We show that these reports are associated with correct overt speech and phonologically related nonword errors, that they relate to word characteristics associated with ease of lexical access but not ease of production, and that they predict whether or not individual words are relearned during anomia treatment. These findings suggest that reports of successful inner speech are meaningful and may be useful to study self-monitoring in aphasia, to better understand anomia, and to predict treatment outcomes. Ultimately, the study of inner speech in people with aphasia could provide critical insights that inform our understanding of normal language.

The role of the phonological lexicon in oral reading is examined in a patient with a small focal left hemisphere lesion. Impaired access to the patient's phonological lexicon is suggested by a number of findings, including the production of phonemic errors across a variety of tasks; increasing difficulty in word production with increasing word length; and difficulty on tests of homophone and rhyme judgments. Two competing models of reading are tested: the nonlexical ("rules") and the lexical ("no-rules") models. The rules model predicts that a disturbance in the phonological lexicon will result in surface alexia; the no-rules model predicts phonological alexia. Results indicate that the patient's reading is most similar to phonological alexia, providing support for the no-rules model. The applicability of the no-rules model to other forms of acquired alexia is explored.

Background: Letter-by-letter readers identify each letter of the word they are reading serially in left to right order before recognising the word. When their letter naming is also impaired, letter-by-letter reading is inaccurate and can render even single word reading very poor. Tactile and/or kinaesthetic strategies have been reported to improve reading in these patients, but only under certain conditions or for a limited set of stimuli. Aims: The primary aim of the current study was to determine whether a tactile/kinaesthetic treatment could significantly improve reading specifically under normal reading conditions, i.e., reading untrained words presented in free vision and read without overt use of the strategy. Methods & Procedures: Three chronic letter-by-letter readers participated in a tactile/kinaesthetic treatment aimed at first improving letter-naming accuracy (phase 1) and then letter-by-letter reading speed (phase 2). In a multiple case series design, accuracy and speed of reading untrained words without overt use of the trained tactile/kinaesthetic strategy was assessed before phase 1, after phase 1, and again after phase 2. Outcomes & Results: All three patients significantly improved both their speed and accuracy in reading untrained words without overt use of the trained tactile/kinaesthetic strategy. All three patients required the additional practice in phase 2 to achieve significant improvement. Treatment did not target sentence-level reading, yet two of the three patients became so adept that they could read entire sentences. Conclusions: This study replicates previous findings on the efficacy of tactile/kinaesthetic treatment for letter-by-letter readers with poor letter naming. It further demonstrates that this treatment can alter cognitive processing such that words never specifically trained can be read in free vision without overtly using the trained strategy. The data suggest that an important element in achieving this level of generalisation is continuing training beyond the point of initial mastery (i.e., accurate letter naming). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]