1980
DOI: 10.1016/0093-934x(80)90061-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Language performance on visual processing tasks in right hemisphere lesion cases

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

1983
1983
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Total main concept points and the absence of main concepts were significantly different between the participants with and without RHD, suggesting a difference in ability to produce narrative main concepts. This is consistent with previous literature, suggesting that persons with RHD produce fewer episodes, fewer complete episodes, and communicated less information than did controls on the narrative task (Delis et al, 1983;Rivers & Love, 1980). Percentage of CIUs and CIUs/minute were also significantly different between the two groups, implying differences in the ability to produce relevant, topically related content during narrative production.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Total main concept points and the absence of main concepts were significantly different between the participants with and without RHD, suggesting a difference in ability to produce narrative main concepts. This is consistent with previous literature, suggesting that persons with RHD produce fewer episodes, fewer complete episodes, and communicated less information than did controls on the narrative task (Delis et al, 1983;Rivers & Love, 1980). Percentage of CIUs and CIUs/minute were also significantly different between the two groups, implying differences in the ability to produce relevant, topically related content during narrative production.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…While not aphasic, RH patients have been observed to be tangential, verbose, and inefficient in their expressive language (Diggs and Basili, 1987;Gardner, 1975;Hecaen, 1978;Hillis, Trupe, & Hillis, 1985;Joanette, Goulet, Ska, & Nespoulous, 1986;Mackisack, Myers, & Duffy, 1987;Rivers & Love, 1980;Roman, Brownell, Potter, Seibold, & Gardner, 1987;Wapner, Hamby, & Gardner, 1981;Weinstein, 1971) and to have difficulty comprehending nonliteral aspects of phrases such as metaphor (Winner & Gardner, 1977), proverbs (Hier & Kaplan, 1986), idioms (Van Lancker & Kempler, 1987), and jokes (Bihrle, Brownell, Powelson, & Gardner, 1986;Brownell, Michel, Powelson, & Gardner, 1983;Gardner, Ling, Flamm, & Silverman, 1975;Wapner et al, 1981).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Disturbances in short-term memory are more explicit in aphasics (Ostergaard and Mendell, 1984). Data is contradictory whether spatial faculty can influence language function (Rivers and Love, 1980). The correlation between the Token test and the MMSE, however, points to a strong relationship with the verbal aspects of the tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%