Passive Elaborative Cueing of Retrieval ProcessesFollowing Traumatic Brain Injury

References

• Lê K, Mozeiko J, Coelho C. Discourse analyses: characterizing cognitive-communication disorders following TBI. ASHA Lead. 2011 Feb;16(2):18–21. doi:10.1044/leader.FTR4.16022011.18.
   Google Scholar
• Sohlberg MM, Mateer CA. Cognitive rehabilitation: an integrative neuropsychological approach. Guilford Publications; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Craik FIM, Tulving E.Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1975;104(3):268–94.doi:10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craik FIM, Lockhart RS. Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav. 1972 Dec;11(6):671–84. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson JR, Reder LM. An elaborative processing explanation of depth of processing. In: Cermak FIM Craik Eds Levels Process Hum Mem Erlbam 1979. 1979. p. 385–404.
   Google Scholar
• Klein SB, Kihlstrom JF.Elaboration, organization, and the self-reference effect in memory. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1986;115(1):26.doi:10.1037/0096-3445.115.1.26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher RP, Craik FIM. The effects of elaboration on recognition memory. Mem Cognit. 1980 Sep;8(5):400–04. doi:10.3758/BF03211136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein K, Saltz E.Specifying the mechanisms in a levels-of-processing approach to memory. J Exp Psychol [Hum Learn]. 1976;2(6):671.doi:10.1037/0278-7393.2.6.671.
   Google Scholar
• Saltz E. The cognitive bases of human learning. xiv, 510 p. (The cognitive bases of human learning.). Dorsey Press, Homewood, IL, US, 1971.
   Google Scholar
• Sauzeon, Sauzeon, Bernard N’Kaoua, Veronique H, N’Kaoua B, Veronique H, N’Kaoua B, Veronique H, Veronique H. Age effect in recall performance according to the levels of processing, elaboration, and retrieval cues. Exp Aging Res. 2000 Jan;26(1):57–73. doi:10.1080/036107300243687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Challis BH, Brodbeck DR.Level of processing affects priming in word fragment completion. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1992;18(3):595–607.doi:10.1037/0278-7393.18.3.595.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscovitch M, Craik FIM. Depth of processing, retrieval cues, and uniqueness of encoding as factors in recall. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav. 1976 Aug;15(4):447–58. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(76)90040-2.
   Google Scholar
• Lindsey A, Bunker L, Mozeiko J, Coelho C. Primed to cue. J Commun Disord. 2020 Jul;86:105998. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2020.105998.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doyle PJ, Goda AJ, Spencer KA. The communicative informativeness and efficiency of connected discourse by adults with aphasia under structured and conversational sampling conditions. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 1995 Nov;4(4):130–34. doi:10.1044/1058-0360.0404.130.
   Google Scholar
• Wheeler RL, Gabbert F. Using self-generated cues to facilitate recall: a narrative review. Front Psychol. 2017 Oct;8(8):1830. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01830.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marini A, Zettin M, Galetto V. Cognitive correlates of narrative impairment in moderate traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychologia. 2014 Nov;64:282–88. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.09.042.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsey A, Hurley E, Mozeiko J, Coelho C.Follow-up on the story goodness index for characterizing discourse deficits following traumatic brain injury. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2019;28(1S):330–40.doi:10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0151.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Curtiss G, Vanderploeg RD, Spencer J, Salazar AM. Patterns of verbal learning and memory in traumatic brain injury. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2001 7;7(5):574–85. doi:10.1017/S1355617701755051.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeLuca J, Schultheis MT, Madigan NK, Christodoulou C, Averill A. Acquisition versus retrieval deficits in traumatic brain injury: implications for memory rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000 Oct;81(10):1327–33. doi:10.1053/apmr.2000.9390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanderploeg RD, Donnell AJ, Belanger HG, Curtiss G. Consolidation deficits in traumatic brain injury: the core and residual verbal memory defect. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2014 Jan 2;36(1):58–73. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2013.864600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gauthier S, LeBlanc J, Seresova A, Laberge-Poirier A, A Correa J, Alturki AY, Marcoux J, Maleki M, Feyz M, De Guise E, et al. Acute prediction of outcome and cognitive-communication impairments following traumatic brain injury: the influence of age, education and site of lesion. J Commun Disord. 2018 May;73:77–90. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2018.04.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King KA, Hough MS, Walker MM, Rastatter M, Holbert D.Mild traumatic brain injury: effects on naming in word retrieval and discourse. Brain Inj. 2006;20(7):725–32.doi:10.1080/02699050600743824.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrow IM, Hough M, Rastatter MP, Walker M, Holbert D, Rotondo MF. Can within-category naming identify subtle cognitive deficits in the mild traumatic brain-injured patient? J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care. 2003 May;54(5):888–97. doi:10.1097/01.TA.0000057150.60668.7C.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hough MS.Word retrieval failure episodes after traumatic brain injury. Aphasiology. 2008;22(6):644–54.doi:10.1080/02687030701541024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer DE, Schvaneveldt RW.Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. J Exp Psychol. 1971;90(2):227–34.doi:10.1037/h0031564.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perri R, Carlesimo GA, Loasses A, Caltagirone C. Deficient intentional access to semantic knowledge in patients with severe closed-head injury. Cortex. 2000 Jan;36(2):213–25. doi:10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70525-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitter-Edgecombe M, Marks W, Fahy JF.Semantic priming after severe closed head trauma: automatic and attentional processes. Neuropsychology. 1993;7(2):136–48.doi:10.1037/0894-4105.7.2.136.
   Google Scholar
• Russell KC, Arenth PM, Scanlon JM, Kessler L, Ricker JH. Hemispheric and executive influences on low-level language processing after traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2012 Jul;26(7–8):984–95. doi:10.3109/02699052.2012.660513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neil-Pirozzi TM, Strangman GE, Goldstein R, Katz DI, Savage CR, Kelkar K, Supelana C, Burke D, Rauch SL, Glenn MB, et al. A controlled treatment study of internal memory strategies (I-MEMS) following traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2010 Jan;25(1):43–51. doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e3181bf24b1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schefft BK, Dulay MF, Fargo JD.The use of a self-generation memory encoding strategy to improve verbal memory and learning in patients with traumatic brain injury. Appl Neuropsychol. 2008;15(1):61–68.doi:10.1080/09084280801917806.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lepping R, Brooks W, Kirchoff B, Martin L, Kurylo M, Ladesich L, et al. Effectiveness of semantic encoding strategy training after traumatic brain injury is correlated with frontal brain activation change. Int J Phys Med Rehabil. Internet]. 2014 [cited 2020 Dec 22];3(1). Available from. ; (). https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/effectiveness-of-semantic-encoding-strategy-training-after-traumatic-brain-injury-2329-9096.1000254.php?aid=36975
   Google Scholar
• Raskin SA, Williams J, Aiken EM. A review of prospective memory in individuals with acquired brain injury. Clin Neuropsychol. 2018 Jul 4;32(5):891–921. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2018.1455898.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDaniel MA, Einstein GO.Strategic and automatic processes in prospective memory retrieval: a multiprocess framework. Appl Cogn Psychol. 2000;14(7):S127–44.doi:10.1002/acp.775.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kliegel M, Martin M, McDaniel MA, Einstein GO.Complex prospective memory and executive control of working memory: a process model. Psychol Test Assess Model. 2002;44(2):303.
   Google Scholar
• Kliegel M, Mackinlay R, Jäger T.Complex prospective memory: development across the lifespan and the role of task interruption. Dev Psychol. 2008;44(2):612–17.doi:10.1037/0012-1649.44.2.612.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einstein GO, McDaniel MA. Retrieval processes in prospective memory: theoretical approaches and some new empirical findings. Prospect Mem Theory Appl. 1996;115–41.
   Google Scholar
• Mäntylä T. Activating actions and interrupting intentions: mechanisms of retrieval sensitization in prospective memory. Prospect Mem Theory Appl. 1996;93–113.
   Google Scholar
• Munte TF, Heinze H-J. Brain potentials reveal deficits of language processing after closed head injury. Arch Neurol. 1994 May 1;51(5):482–93. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1994.00540170058017.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Key-DeLyria SE. Sentence processing in traumatic brain injury: evidence from the P600. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016 Aug;59(4):759–71. doi:10.1044/2016_JSLHR-L-15-0104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knuepffer C, Murdoch BE, Lloyd D, Lewis FM, Hinchliffe FJ. Reduced N400 semantic priming effects in adult survivors of paediatric and adolescent traumatic brain injury. Brain Lang. 2012 Oct;123(1):52–63. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2012.06.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fratantoni JM, DeLaRosa BL, Didehbani N, Hart J, Kraut MA. Electrophysiological Correlates of Word Retrieval in Traumatic Brain Injury. J Neurotrauma. 2017 Mar;34(5):1017–21. doi:10.1089/neu.2016.4651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kutas M, Hillyard SA.Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science. 1980;207(4427):203–05.doi:10.1126/science.7350657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kutas M, Federmeier KD, Kutas M, Federmeier KD. Thirty Years and. Counting: finding Meaning in the N400 Component of the Event-Related Brain Potential (ERP). Annu Rev Psychol. 2011 Jan 10;62(1):621–47. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wechsler D. Wechsler test of adult reading: WTAR. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson SM, Eriksson DK, Schneck SM, Lucanie JM, Jäncke L. A quick aphasia battery for efficient, reliable, and multidimensional assessment of language function. PLOS ONE. 2018 Feb 9;13(2):e0192773. Jäncke L, editor. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0192773
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson BA, Emslie H, Foley J, Shiel A, Watson P, Hawkins K, et al. The Cambridge Pro-spective Memory Test. London: UK. Wilson, B.A., Emslie, H., Foley, J., Shiel, A., Watson, P., Haw-kins, K., Groot, Y., & Evans, J. London, UK: Harcourt; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Coltheart M.The MRC psycholinguistic database. Q J Exp Psychol Sect A. 1981;33(4):497–505.doi:10.1080/14640748108400805.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brysbaert M, Warriner AB, Kuperman V.Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behav Res Methods. 2014;46(3):904–11.doi:10.3758/s13428-013-0403-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paivio A. Imagery and verbal processes. Psychology Press; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Fliessbach K, Weis S, Klaver P, Elger CE, Weber B. The effect of word concreteness on recognition memory. NeuroImage. 2006 Sep;32(3):1413–21. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.06.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madan CR, Glaholt MG, Caplan JB. The influence of item properties on association-memory. J Mem Lang. 2010 Jul;63(1):46–63. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2010.03.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadoski M, Goetz ET, Fritz JB.Impact of concreteness on comprehensibility, interest, and memory for text: implications for dual coding theory and text design. J Educ Psychol. 1993;85(2):291–304.doi:10.1037/0022-0663.85.2.291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider E, Zuccoloto A. E-prime 2.0 [Computer software]. Pittsbg PA Psychol Softw Tools. 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Macmillan NA, Creelman CD. Detection theory: a user’s guide. Psychology press; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Team RC. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. 2013;
   Google Scholar
• Team Rs. RStudio: integrated development for R. RStudio Inc Boston MA URL Httpwww Rstudio Com. 2015;42:14.
   Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen RHB. lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. J Stat Softw. Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Jun 15];82(13). Doi:10.18637/jss.v082.i13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenth R, Singmann H, Love J. Emmeans: estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R Package Version. 2018;1:1.
   Google Scholar
• Barton K. Package “MuMIn”: multi-Model Inference. R package, Version 1.15. 6. URL Httpscran R-Proj OrgwebpackagesMuMInindex Html Accessed 2016- 10-22. 2016;
   Google Scholar
• Nakagawa S, Schielzeth H, O’Hara RB. A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. O’Hara RB, editor. Methods Ecol Evol. 2013 Feb;4(2):133–42. DOI:10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickham H. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis, Second, Cham: Springer, 260 p. (Use R!) 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson-Klavehn A, Gardiner JM.Depth-of-processing effects on priming in stem completion: tests of the voluntary-contamination, conceptual-processing, and lexical-processing hypotheses. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1998;24(3):593–609.doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.3.593.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• German DJ. Test of adolescent/adult word finding, Pro-Ed. 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Efstratiadou EA, Papathanasiou I, Holland R, Archonti A, Hilari K, Systematic A. Review of semantic feature analysis therapy studies for Aphasia. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018 May 17;61(5):1261–78. doi: 10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-16-0330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wambaugh J. A comparison of the relative effects of phonologic and semantic cueing treatments. Aphasiology. 2003 Jan;17(5):433–41. doi:10.1080/02687030344000085.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wambaugh J, Doyle P, Martinez A, Kalinyak-Fliszar M.Effects of two lexical retrieval cueing treatments on action naming in aphasia. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2002;39(4):455–565.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Penningroth SL. Effects of attentional demand, cue typicality, and priming on an event-based prospective memory task. Appl Cogn Psychol. 2005 Nov;19(7):885–97. doi:10.1002/acp.1116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mangels JA, Picton TW, Craik FIM. Attention and successful episodic encoding: an event-related potential study. Cogn Brain Res. 2001 Mar;11(1):77–95. doi:10.1016/S0926-6410(00)00066-5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barnea A, Breznitz Z. Phonological and orthographic processing of hebrew words: electrophysiological aspects. J Genet Psychol. 1998 Dec;159(4):492–504. doi:10.1080/00221329809596166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer AF, Donchin E.Brain potentials as indices of orthographic and phonological interaction during word matching. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1987;13(1):76.doi:10.1037/0278-7393.13.1.76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee C-Y, Liu Y-N, Tsai J-L. The time course of contextual effects on visual word recognition. Front Psychol. Internet]. 2012 [cited 2020 Jun 15];3. Available from. ; . http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00285/abstract
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods. 2004 Mar;134(1):9–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009.
   Google Scholar
• Lopez-Calderon J, Luck SJ. ERPLAB: an open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Front Hum Neurosci [Internet]. 2014 Apr 14 [cited 2020 Jun 15];8. Available from: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00213/abstract. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00213.
   Google Scholar
• Groppe DM, Urbach TP, Kutas M. Mass univariate analysis of event-related brain potentials/fields I: A critical tutorial review: Mass univariate analysis of ERPs/ERFs I: Review. Psychophysiology. 2011 Dec;48(12):1711–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01273.x.
   Google Scholar
• Fields EC. Factorial Mass Univariate ERP Toolbox. Computer software] Retrieved from https://github.com/ericcfields/FMUT/releases. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Groppe DM, Urbach TP, Kutas M. Mass univariate analysis of event-related brain potentials/fields II: Simulation studies: Mass univariate analysis of ERPs/ERFs II. Psychophysiology. 2011 Dec;48(12):1726–37. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01272.x.
   Google Scholar
• Bullmore ET, Suckling J, Overmeyer S, Rabe-Hesketh S, Taylor E, Brammer MJ. Global, voxel, and cluster tests, by theory and permutation, for a difference between two groups of structural MR images of the brain. IEEE transactions on medical imaging. 1999;18(1):32–42. doi: 10.1109/42.750253.
   Google Scholar