Sequential learning in individuals with agrammatic aphasia: evidence from artificial grammar learning

Schuchard, Julia; Thompson, Cynthia K.

doi:10.1080/20445911.2017.1293065

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such lasting priming effects in healthy speakers have been argued to reflect implicit learning rather than transient activation of primed structures (Bock et al, 2007; Bock & Griffin, 2000; Ferreira et al, 2008; Hartsuiker et al, 2008). Thus, in agrammatic speakers, these results are consistent with findings that implicit language learning ability may be spared (Schuchard & Thompson, 2014, in press) rather than impaired (Christiansen et al (2010); Zimmerer et al (2014).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Some studies suggest that individuals with agrammatic aphasia show retained ability to learn novel linguistic sequences, including artificial grammars (Schuchard & Thompson, 2014, in press), whereas other studies report learning impairments (Christiansen, Louise Kelly, Shillcock, & Greenfield, 2010; Zimmerer, Cowell, & Varley, 2014). In Experiment 2 , we examined implicit language learning abilities by testing the lasting effects of structural priming (i.e., with two or four intervening sentences between prime and target sentences).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Grammatical encoding and learning in agrammatic aphasia: Evidence from structural priming

Cho-Reyes¹,

Mack

Thompson

2016

Journal of Memory and Language

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study addressed open questions about the nature of sentence production deficits in agrammatic aphasia. In two structural priming experiments, 13 aphasic and 13 age-matched control speakers repeated visually- and auditorily-presented prime sentences, and then used visually-presented word arrays to produce dative sentences. Experiment 1 examined whether agrammatic speakers form structural and thematic representations during sentence production, whereas Experiment 2 tested the lasting effects of structural priming in lags of two and four sentences. Results of Experiment 1 showed that, like unimpaired speakers, the aphasic speakers evinced intact structural priming effects, suggesting that they are able to generate such representations. Unimpaired speakers also evinced reliable thematic priming effects, whereas agrammatic speakers did so in some experimental conditions, suggesting that access to thematic representations may be intact. Results of Experiment 2 showed structural priming effects of comparable magnitude for aphasic and unimpaired speakers. In addition, both groups showed lasting structural priming effects in both lag conditions, consistent with implicit learning accounts. In both experiments, aphasic speakers with more severe language impairments exhibited larger priming effects, consistent with the “inverse preference” prediction of implicit learning accounts. The findings indicate that agrammatic speakers are sensitive to structural priming across levels of representation and that such effects are lasting, suggesting that structural priming may be beneficial for the treatment of sentence production deficits in agrammatism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grammatical encoding and learning in agrammatic aphasia: Evidence from structural priming

Cho-Reyes¹,

Mack

Thompson

2016

Journal of Memory and Language

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results conflict with the idea that agrammatic aphasia is associated with damage to domain-general mechanisms that subserve both sequence learning and syntactic processing (Christiansen et al, 2010). Although previous studies have shown impairments in implicit sequence learning co-occurring with syntactic impairments after brain injury (Christiansen et al, 2010; Zimmerer et al, 2014), the present results suggest otherwise and support previous studies showing implicit sequence learning ability in people with agrammatic aphasia (Goschke et al, 2001; Schuchard & Thompson, 2014; Schuchard & Thompson, in preparation). Future studies should be designed to examine factors such as lesion site that may contribute to the variability in implicit learning abilities in this population, which will further the understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying learning and language.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Additionally, a study that used a visual artificial grammar showed implicit learning deficits associated with agrammatic aphasia (Christiansen, Kelly, Shillcock, & Greenfield, 2010). However, a separate visual artificial grammar study in which the results were analyzed at an individual level suggested that the extent and types of learning impairment are highly heterogeneous among individuals with aphasia (Zimmerer, Cowell, & Varley, 2014), and a recent study showed evidence of exposure-based artificial grammar learning in the verbal domain in people with agrammatic aphasia (Schuchard & Thompson, in preparation). If implicit learning processes are engaged in implicit treatment approaches, then the individual differences in implicit learning abilities that have been demonstrated in prior research may affect the outcomes of treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit learning and implicit treatment outcomes in individuals with aphasia

Schuchard¹,

Nerantzini

Thompson

2016

Aphasiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Implicit learning is a process of learning that occurs outside of conscious awareness and may be involved in implicit, exposure-based language training. However, research shows that implicit learning abilities are variable among individuals with aphasia, and it remains unknown whether individuals who show basic implicit learning abilities also benefit from implicit language training. Aims The aims of this series of experiments were to test implicit learning in individuals with agrammatic aphasia, examine the effects of a novel implicit language treatment, and investigate whether individuals with aphasia who show implicit learning ability also benefit from implicit treatment focused on passive sentence comprehension. Methods & Procedures Nine participants with chronic agrammatic aphasia and 21 neurologically intact participants completed a visuomotor serial reaction time test of implicit learning (Experiment 1). The participants with aphasia also completed a short-term novel implicit sentence comprehension treatment (Experiment 2) that consisted of five sessions of repeated exposure to grammatically correct passive sentences and matching photographs. Sentence comprehension was tested in multiple baseline sessions and on each day of training using a sentence-picture matching task. The relation between participants’ learning patterns across experiments was also examined. Outcomes & Results Individuals with agrammatic aphasia as well as neurologically intact adults demonstrated significant implicit sequence learning in the serial reaction time task. However, the participants with aphasia did not show concomitant improvement in sentence comprehension as a result of the implicit treatment protocol. Conclusions This study suggests that individuals with agrammatic aphasia demonstrate implicit learning ability; however, this ability does not necessarily promote successful outcomes in treatment that is based solely on implicit training methods.

show abstract

“…An alternative view of the role of LIFG in AGL comes from Schuchard and Thompson (2017). They used a PSG to generate strings of auditory syllables and found a similar, but relatively low, level of learning in agrammatic patients and controls after the first training session, but significantly superior learning in the controls after a second training session.…”

Section: Artificial Grammar Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Neuroscience of Implicit Learning

Williams

2020

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decades, research employing artificial grammar, sequence learning, and statistical learning paradigms has flourished, not least because these methods appear to offer a window, albeit with a restricted view, on implicit learning processes underlying natural language learning. But these paradigms usually provide relatively little exposure, use meaningless stimuli, and do not even necessarily target natural language structures. So the question arises whether they engage the same brain regions as natural language. The aim of this review is to use data from brain imaging, brain stimulation, and the effects of brain damage to identify the main brain regions that show sensitivity to structural regularities in implicit learning paradigms and to consider their relationship to natural language processing and learning. This article is not a meta-analysis of studies in the field, nor will it advance a particular theoretical perspective, or systematically lay out an agenda for future research (though indications of outstanding questions and possible avenues for research emerge along the way). Rather it is an attempt to lay out the state of the art in the field for the nonspecialist, hoping to highlight, if nothing else, the complexities and inconsistencies in the evidence base, how these might be related to methodological variations, and to emphasize the problems inherent in making generalizations about localization of brain function on the basis of the evidence reviewed. With a view to the latter, the following section briefly lays out some of the ongoing debates over the function of core brain regions in relation to language processing and nonimplicit learning of natural languagelike systems.

show abstract

Sequential learning in individuals with agrammatic aphasia: evidence from artificial grammar learning

Cited by 11 publications

References 33 publications

Grammatical encoding and learning in agrammatic aphasia: Evidence from structural priming

Grammatical encoding and learning in agrammatic aphasia: Evidence from structural priming

Implicit learning and implicit treatment outcomes in individuals with aphasia

The Neuroscience of Implicit Learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About