Priming sentence comprehension in aphasia: Effects of lexically independent and specific structural priming.
Jiyeon Lee, Emily Hosokawa, Sarah Meehan and 2 others
PMID 31814655WHAT IT FOUND
After reading a sentence with a particular structure, people with aphasia and healthy older adults were more likely to choose that structure for a later ambiguous sentence.
Repeating the verb did not add extra help.
Key findings
01When the target sentence came right after the prime, both groups chose the same reading more often, and repeating the verb did not make the effect larger.
02The same reading bias remained when two unrelated trials intervened: healthy older adults showed a 10% difference, and people with aphasia showed a 12% difference.
03Response times showed a same-reading advantage in Experiment 1, but Experiment 2 did not show clear response-time priming.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study tested laboratory sentence comprehension, not everyday communication or treatment outcomes. The aphasia group was small, with 18 participants analysed in each experiment, and the aphasia types and severity varied. People with aphasia were less accurate than controls on the prime sentences, and reading comprehension was not comprehensively assessed, so reading difficulty may have affected some results. The study used only six verbs from one semantic category, so the findings may not extend to other verbs or sentence materials. Response times were not constrained by a time limit, making the timing results harder to interpret. The study did not compare comprehension-to-production or production-to-comprehension priming, so it cannot show whether the same priming mechanism supports production.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that structural priming is an effective aphasia treatment. This was a laboratory comprehension task with 18 people with aphasia per experiment, and it did not test therapy or communication outcomes.