AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-8816/105
1 Post-Graduate student, Department of Speech Language Pathology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysore, Karnataka, India
2 Assistant Professor in Language Pathology, Department of Speech Language Pathology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysore, Karnataka, India.
*Corresponding Author: Abhishek BP, Assistant Professor in Language Pathology, Department of Speech Language Pathology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysore, Karnataka, India.
Citation: Shetty Mahima J., Drishti Sreenath, and Abhishek BP, (2023), Sequence of Picture presentation in Blocked Naming and its relevance to Naming Abilities in Persons with Aphasia. J. Clinical Research Notes. 4(4); DOI: 10.31579/2690-8816/105
Copyright: © 2023, Abhishek BP, this is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 03 August 2023 | Accepted: 22 August 2023 | Published: 04 September 2023
Keywords: facilitation; inhibition; paraphasia; competition; aphasia
Background:The study tests the two mechanisms of lexical semantic activation (facilitation versus inhibition) using blocked naming task.
Objective:To compare the naming accuracy scores on semantically related, unrelated and thematically related blocks: 9 participants with Aphasia (5 persons with anomic aphasia 4 persons with Broca’s aphasia were considered) for the study. Blocked naming task was administered on the participants
Results: The mean scores were more for unrelated block compared to thematically related and semantically related blocks. The results on Friedman’s test showed significant difference between the blocks. The descriptive scores in adjunct to the statistic favoured inhibition
Conclusion:The underlying competition among the related items in the semantically related blocks would have impeded the lexical activation in persons with aphasia.
Lexical access refers to the phenomenon of “linking the lexical-semantic representation” with its phonological or orthographic representation [1]. The production of speech requires the intended meaning to provide access to the phonological form of the word that underlies its articulatory output. The activation and retrieval of this information, as sound meaning relationships of the lexical entries in the mental lexicon, is termed as lexical access. The three main cognitive processes involved in lexical access are lexical semantic activation, competition and selection. The serial search models postulate that a lexical item could only be in one location in the mental lexicon and retrieval is a step by step process. However, several categories could be used to determine its location. The autonomous search model is one such serial search model that views word recognition process as having three separate parts: orthographic (visual), phonological (sound) and semantic/syntactic (meaning). Input from any modality can be accessed one at a time and all the information is stored in the lexicon and not in the individual ‘files’. The master lexicon is organized into three bins, with the frequent entries being stored on top. Entries are hypothesized to be searched in these bins, in a serial manner, until a relevant lexical entry is found. This is then cross referenced against the input to ensure accuracy for an exact perceptual match. Search is terminated once the correct lexical entry has been located. In activation, the individual searches their semantic memory for lexical entries that have semantic features related to the target item. Such lexical entries are excited and compete to be chosen. The lexical entry is chosen at a uniqueness point, where that lexical entry with the highest level of activation is finally selected as the most appropriate target.
During the lemma node activation stage, words related to the target will be activated and these ‘related words’ may either facilitate the activation of target word or may impede the activation of a given word. The former is called facilitation and the latter is called inhibition. The empirical evidence for facilitation and inhibition is derived from priming and word picture-interference paradigm respectively. The blocked naming task provides neutral evidence investigating facilitation versus inhibition.
When a target item is preceded by another item semantically related or unrelated to that target item, a facilitatory or inhibitory effect can occur. Various methods based on different underlying theoretical principles have been proposed to tap the patterns of lexical semantic activation. Studies based on the priming principle are used frequently, owing to the procedural simplicity. Priming refers to an implicit memory effect in which exposure to one stimulus influences the response to a subsequent stimulus. The first item presented is called the prime and the item to which a response has to be made is called the target. Semantic priming refers to the observation that there is an increase in the speed and/or accuracy of a participant’s response to a target when exposed to a related as compared to an unrelated prime. In a blocked or cyclic naming on the other hand the pictures are presented in the form of cycles or blocks. For instance semantically related pictures would be presented in succession and would impose constraints on activation, in contrast an unrelated block will have pictures from assorted categories. based on dependent variables like naming latency and accuracy for related versus unrelated blocks the mechanism of lexical semantic activation would be deduced (if naming latency and accuracy for related is better than unrelated, facilitation is assumed to be operational and visa-versa.
These two mechanisms of lexical -semantic activation have been investigated in persons with aphasia. The seminal study in this direction was done by Costa, Alario & Carmazza, 2005 [2]. This study used word picture interference paradigm. In this paradigm, the precursor is presented before the target. The pre-cursor was either related to the target semantically or was unrelated. Distractor-precursor words from the same category as the target produced interference while the distractor-precursor words from different category as the target produced facilitation. This study is important as it abolished the conventional view regarding facilitation and inhibition (the conventional view postulates the belief that the precursor or prime semantically related to the target can facilitate the target)
Schnur, et al, 2006 [3] used blocked naming task to study lexical access in individuals with non-aphasia and aphasia. The non-aphasia individuals comprised of controls to persons with aphasia. It was observed that the individuals in control group exhibited longer naming latencies when the pictures were ‘blocked’ by the lexical category and had increased repetition rate, Similarly the blocking effects were evident in persons in Broca’s aphasia considered in this study. Further the error analysis revealed the errors increased as a consequence of competition in the related block. Thus, the proponents in the study clearly highlight the presence of inhibition’ in lexical semantic activation.
A similar study was carried out by Creet, Howard and Nickels (2006) [4]. 23 participants with aphasia were considered for the study. The participants were asked to name 50 pictures on seven different occasions. Hence the paradigm was called as repeated naming tasks. It was found that 7 participants were able to name the pictures on a consistent basis and the authors highlighted the facilitation evoked by the pictures. In some participants considered for the study, there was inhibition also hence no conclusive evidence was derived pertaining to lexical semantic activation from the current study.
Another study carried out by Janssen, Schirm, Mahon & Caramazza (2008) [5]. The proponents in the current study called their naming paradigm as delayed naming task. The distractor words were super-imposed with the target and the task of the participants was to name the target word. In the first experimental condition, the target picture was preceded by the word by 1000 milliseconds, in the contrasting condition, the target picture superimposed the word and it was observed that semantic interference was observed even for words preceding the target, thus the inference observed not only the words interfered with the semantic activation but also when it preceded it. Thus, the different studies in this direction have evoked different findings and there is no uniform pattern pertaining to lexical semantic activation especially in persons with aphasia,
Need for the study:
The salient feature of the current study is that, it used a thematic block, in addition to the conventional related and unrelated blocks as it can have differential effect (Pino etal, 2022) [6].
Aim:
In the current study, these two mechanisms of lexical semantic activation were investigated in individuals with aphasia.
Objectives:
To compare the naming accuracy scores for related, unrelated and thematic blocks.
Participants: Convenient sampling was used for the recruitment of participants and 9 participants were subsequently enrolled. As the task required the participants to have considerably good naming skills, persons with mild-moderate variants of Aphasia were considered. WAB-R (Ravikumar, Vijayashree & Shyamala, 2001) [7] revealed that 5 participants had Anomic Aphasia and 4 participants had Broca’s Aphasia. The mean age range of the participants was 53.4 years and all the participants considered for the study were males. The average post stroke duration was 7.2 months. Some of the participants had received therapy in their past while few other participants were receiving therapy even at the time of conduct of the current study, however goals on naming were not considered for participants under-going therapy.
Stimulus and Procedure: Blocked naming task was administered on the participants. 36 pictures were presented in three blocks. (12 pictures in related category: Animals, 12 in unrelated and 12 in thematic category with round objects as the theme). The pictures were taken from copy-right free internet sources, the naming agreement was checked in between the three investigators of the current study, those items with 100 % agreement were considered for consolidating the final stimulus for the study.
Each picture within a block was displayed for 6000 milliseconds using Microsoft PowerPoint presentation. The slides were timed for this stipulated duration. The participants were asked to name the pictures as they were presented. Measures like vocal reaction time was not considered Responses were noted and were categorized as correct response, no response, semantic paraphasia, phonemic paraphasia, perseverations and time lapse response. Each correct response was given a score of 1, while the other categories of responses listed above were given a score of 0. The maximum score for each block was 12.
The participants with aphasia were further not sub grouped based on the type of aphasia as the sample size was limited. The median scores for the three blocks (related, unrelated vs thematic) were 5.8, 8.3 and 7.2 respectively (the maximum score is 12). The median scores were more for unrelated blocks, thematically related blocks and semantically related blocks. Informally it was noted that participants with Broca’s aphasia had more of phonemic paraphasic responses while persons with anomic aphasia had more of ‘no responses’ followed by semantic paraphasia. The data was subjected to test of normality using Shapiro-Wilk’s test of normality. The Z score obtained was 0.034 indicating that the data was non-normally distributed.
Figure 1: Median scores for the three blocks (related, unrelated and thematic)
Further Friedman’s test was used to verify if there was any significant difference across the blocks and the X2 value was 2.33 (p<0>
This was in consonance with the findings of Schnur, et al, 2006. However, this study used a comparative group design unlike the current study which involved only participants with Aphasia. It found that persons with aphasia were ‘blocked’ in other words, persons with aphasia performed poorly on semantically related block due to the impedance offered by the lexical items in the related block. The findings of the current study cannot be compared with the other studies as the ‘phenomenon’ under consideration facilitation versus inhibition is sensitive to the task undertaken. The other interesting finding was that scores on thematic block was better compared to related block showing that the categorically related and thematically related words had differential effect (Pino et al, 2022). The findings of the study can be considered as preliminary as it was done on fewer participants and the participants were further not grouped based on the type of aphasia.
The study was undertaken to investigate the mechanism of lexical semantic activation in persons with aphasia. Persons with milder variants of aphasia secured less scores for related compared to unrelated blocks suggesting inhibition.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
