Structural priming from production to comprehension in aphasia.
Austin D Keen, Jiyeon Lee
PMID 38239274WHAT IT FOUND
After producing the primed meaning, people with aphasia and controls chose more pictures matching that meaning for ambiguous sentences, and the shift remained in an unprimed post-test.
Key findings
01During the priming block, participants selected pictures matching the low-attachment meaning more often than in the pre-test: people with aphasia went from 17.3% to 28.7%, and controls went from 6.5% to 31.3%.
02In the unprimed post-test, participants selected pictures matching the low-attachment meaning more often than in the pre-test: people with aphasia went from 17.3% to 26.9%, and controls went from 6.5% to 35%.
03The size of the change from pre-test to priming block was not significantly different between people with aphasia and controls, and the change from pre-test to post-test was not significantly different between groups.
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 included only 13 people with aphasia and 14 controls, and one control participant's data were excluded from analysis, so the results are preliminary. People with aphasia had mild-to-moderate aphasia and relatively preserved single-word and simple-sentence comprehension, so the findings may not apply to more severe aphasia. The target sentences contained ambiguous prepositional phrases, which the authors note are not frequently used in daily communication. The lasting effect was measured only in a post-test that immediately followed the priming block, not at 1-week or 1-month follow-up. The study did not examine how individual language deficits related to the size of the priming effect.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that structural priming is an established treatment for aphasia comprehension deficits. The study tested a single experimental session in 13 people with aphasia and 14 controls, used ambiguous prepositional phrases, and did not measure clinical treatment outcomes.