![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
Background: Evidence from the picture–word interference literature reveals that picture–word pairs bearing a non-categorical relationship (e.g., RING—expensive) will facilitate naming more than picture–word pairs bearing a categorical relationship (e.g., BRACELET—earrings). It is not known whether these differential effects would be found within a naming treatment paradigm for aphasia; however, if it is the case that one type of semantic relations will yield more robust treatment effects than another, this would provide a more efficient and effective delivery of treatment. Moreover, since semantic errors are commonly produced by individuals with aphasia, an approach which helps strengthen the semantic network will, in turn, strengthen lexical retrieval and access processes.
Aim: The aim of the study was to compare a features condition, or a condition in which attributes were used, to a categorical condition, or a condition in which categorical members were used to see which would yield greater naming improvements in aphasia.
Methods & Procedures: Eight individuals with aphasia were recruited for the study. A multiple-baseline design across behaviours with a crossover component was used. A categorical–features sequence was used in four participants, and a features–categorical sequence was used in four other participants. Accuracy of correct naming was calculated to determine improvements in treatment. The types of naming errors produced by individuals with positive treatment effects in the trained condition were compared to the types of naming errors produced in the control condition.
Outcome & Results: A range of small to large treatment effect sizes was obtained in six of the eight participants when considering both treated conditions. However, no overwhelming advantage was found for either condition. Analyses of naming error patterns indicated increased lexical access and retrieval of the targeted picture name.
Conclusions: Approaches that use cues focusing either on categorical membership or attributes will facilitate naming abilities in individuals with aphasia whether naming per cent accuracy is calculated or naming error types are tallied. However, the current results did not indicate an overwhelming advantage in using one or the other condition. Future studies should specify the type of features used (e.g., associative cues, thematic cues or perceptual cues) to determine whether such a differentiation will yield clearer differential treatment effects.