1. impulsive responses are common for damage in which area of the brain
    wernikie's area, right hemisphere
  2. effects of brain damage: (8)

    • 1. altered responsiveness
    • 2. persevertation (stuck on something)
    • 3. diminished response flexibility
    • 4. concreteness and difficulty with abstract concepts
    • 5. impaire self-monitoring
    • 6. difficulty focusing and sustaining attention
    • 7. disturbances of personality and emotion
    • 8. other information processing deficits
  3. what did aphasia definition used to be?
    used to describe any language problem
  4. to be considered aphasic...
    damage needs to be in left hemisphere and/or affect language
  5. aphasia is considered what kind of disorder?
  6. central disorder (aphasia) means:
    the language disorder was central to the language modalities
  7. expressive language modalities
    speech, writing, gestural
  8. receptive language modalities
    visual/reading, auditory, tactile
  9. who created first aphasia test, wrote books, created graph of aphasia impairment curve
  10. how is aphasia described in relation to the modalities affected
    deep central disorder
  11. shallow centrality of modalities
    receptive or expressive modalities affected
  12. deep centrality of modalities
    all modalities affected
  13. 2 kinds of anomia
    omission and commission
  14. three different kinds of paraphasias
    • phonemic
    • verbal
    • neologistic
  15. phonemic paraphasias
    substitutions, addition, or rearrangement of speech sounds so that the error sounds similar to the target (pike for pipe)
  16. two types of verbal paraphasias
    semantic and unrelated
  17. semantic verbal paraphasia
    • error bears semantic relationship to the target
    • ex: wife for husband
  18. unrelated verbal paraphasia
    • error bears no semantic relationship to the target
    • ex: chair for scissors
  19. verbal paraphasia
    a pathological breakdown in the semantic boundaries between words that are related
  20. neologistic paraphasia
    • fluently spoken paraphasia, bear no relationship to the patient's native language, usually dont t recognize their error
    • ex: planker for comb
  21. agrammatisms are associated with fluent or non fluent patients?
  22. agrammatisms
    • word retrieval difficulties
    • disorders of syntax/grammar
  23. in agrammatisms, which words of the sentence are ommitted
    functors (words that dont carry meaning), content words are kept
  24. degree of agrammatism, the number of words omitted in an utterance, depends on:
    the severity of the patient
  25. pseudoagrammatism
    one word phrases that sum up a response

    ex: answer with "stroke" instead of "I had a stroke"
  26. telegraphic speech
    • basic parts of a sentence may be uttered in a simple utterance
    • ex: go target buy candy
  27. telegraphic speech vs pseudoagrammatism
    telegraphic speech is less severe
  28. verbal stereotypic speech
    involuntary, repeated utterance that may make up the patient's entire vocab

    ex: "I know:...
  29. auditory comprehension and reading comprehension processes are more/less impaired than expressive modalities
    less impaired
  30. 5 factors that can affect comprehension:
    • 1. length of stimulus
    • 2. semantic and syntactic complexity of stimulus
    • 3. rate and pausing
    • 4. plausibility
    • 5. negation
  31. length of stimuli affect on comprehention
    • shorter stimuli: can be easier
    • longer stimuli: more descriptive, context of many words vs 1 word
    • too long: cause neurological break down, more memory load, processing time is slower--the processing is hindered if too long
  32. affect of Semantic and syntactic complexity of stimulus on comprehension
    • the less complex--easier to understand--more syntactic.
    • semantic complexity differs in words (toothbrush has more word frequency than asparagus)
  33. affect of rate and pausing on comprehension
    patient must have time to process what they read and hear: add pauses and slow down your speech when talk to them
  34. affect of plausibility on comprehension
    if what is read/heard is more plausible (more likely to happen) they have easier time understanding
  35. affect of negation on comprehension
    patient can understand positive statements better than negative (dont use: not, on, don't, 'n't)
  36. how and why is aphasics classified?
    • classified into syndromes.
    • is helpful in professional communication: there are fixed patterns of linguistic behaviors
  37. what is the problem with classifying aphasic patients?
    classifying into syndromes makes the assumption that everyone in that group has similar symptoms with similar patterns and ignore important individual differences
  38. 3 different classification systems for aphasia
    • 1. fluent vs nonfluent
    • 2. anterior vs posterior
    • 3. Boston system
  39. anterior vs posterior classification system for aphasia
    location of lesion relative to the rolandic fissure (central sulcus)
  40. boston system of aphasia
    related to syndromes
  41. nonfluent aphasic syndromes (3)
    broca's, global, transcortical motor
  42. fluent aphasic syndromes
    wernicke's, conduction, anomic, transcortical sensory
  43. 4 classification factors of Boston system:
    • 1. naming (have naming problem)
    • 2. fluency
    • 3. auditory comprehension (good/bad)
    • 4. repetition (good/bad)
  44. what percentage of aphasic patients are classifiable?
  45. based on boston system, symptoms of wernicke's aphasia
    naming problem, fluent, poor comprehension, poor repetition
  46. based on boston system, symptoms of transcortical sensory aphasia
    naming problem, fluent, poor comprehension, good repetition
  47. based on boston system, symptoms of conduction aphasia
    naming problem, fluent, good auditory comprehension, poor repetition
  48. based on Boston system, symptoms of anomic aphasia:
    naming problem, fluent, good auditory comprehension, good repetition
  49. based on Boston system, symptoms on transcortical motor aphasia
    naming problem, non-fluent, good auditory comprehension, good repetition
  50. based on Boston system, symptoms of broca's aphasia
    naming problem, non-fluent, good auditory comprehension, poor repetition
  51. based on boston system, symptoms of global aphasia
    naming problem, non-fluent, poor auditory comprehension
  52. area of the brain affected with Broca's aphasia
    extend little posterior of the central sulcus and quite aways down
  53. area of the brain affect with conduction aphasia
    lesion along the communication pathway from the temporal lobe to the frontal lobe
  54. language symptoms of conduction aphasia
    they can say words, but cannot repeat them
  55. language symptoms of transcortical sensory aphasia
    can repeat, but do not comprehend well
  56. language symptoms of transcortical motor aphasia
    their repetition is better than fluency
  57. most common type of aphasia
    brocca's (25% of patients)
Card Set