Volume 4, Issue 12 (Winter 2018)                   Caspian.J.Neurol.Sci 2018, 4(12): 6-12 | Back to browse issues page


XML Print


1- MA Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
2- Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
Abstract:   (399 Views)
Background: Various factors influence the natural processing of words. The present study sought to investigate the effect of the regularity variable on the reading of words.
Objectives: The participants in the study were 50 normal and 5 aphasic people (of Broca, transcortical motor and conduction aphasia types) who were selected through convenience sampling method.
Materials & Methods: It was a quantitative study with quasi-experimental design. In this research, reading aloud subtest of the test 53 of the Psycholinguistic Assessment of Language Processing in Aphasia (PALPA) battery of tests was nativized and used. First, the mean and standard deviation was computed for the test scores of the two groups of participants (i.e. normal and aphasics). Regarding the aphasics’ data, after verifying their normality of distribution by Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test, paired samples t-test was used to compare the mean scores on the results of the test on regular and exception words.
Results: Since normal subjects scored a perfect grade (SD=0), it was found that the regularity variable had no effect on the reading process in these individuals. Based on the results of paired samples t-test in the aphasic subjects (P=0.25), it was found that the regularity variable in these individuals has no effect on their reading process, too.
Conclusion: The evidence from the present study shows that the word regularity has no impact on the reading of words in both normal and aphasic adults. The theoretical and clinical implications of the findings would be discussed.
Keywords: Aphasia, Reading, Language
Full-Text [PDF 1131 kb]   (88 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (143 Views)  
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2017/04/11 | Accepted: 2017/11/4 | Published: 2018/01/1

References
1. Bock JK, Levelt WJ. Language production: Grammatical encoding. In: Traxler M, Ann M, editors. Handbook of PsychoLinguistics. London: Academic Press; 1994.
2. Caramazza A. Data, statistics, and theory: A comment on Bates, McDonald, MacWhinney, and Applebaum's "A maximum likelihood procedure for the analysis of group and individual data in aphasia research". Brain Lang. 1991; 41(1):43-51. doi: 10.1016/0093-934x(91)90109-e [DOI:10.1016/0093-934X(91)90109-E]
3. Kay J, Lesser R, Coltheart M. Psycholinguistic assessments of language processing in aphasia (PALPA): An introduction. Aphasiology. 1996; 10(2):159–80. doi: 10.1080/02687039608248403 [DOI:10.1080/02687039608248403]
4. Rayner K, Pollatsek A. Basic processes in reading. In: Reisberg D, editor. The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013. [DOI:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376746.013.0028]
5. Rayner K, Pollatsek A, Ashby J, Clifton JRC. Psychology of reading. New York: Psychology Press; 2012.
6. Madan CR, Glaholt MG, Caplan JB. The influence of item properties on association-memory. J Mem Lang. 2010; 63(1):46–63. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2010.03.001 [DOI:10.1016/j.jml.2010.03.001]
7. Barber HA, Otten LJ, Kousta ST, Vigliocco G. Concreteness in word processing: ERP and behavioral effects in a lexical decision task. Brain Lang. 2013; 125(1):47–53. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2013.01.005 [DOI:10.1016/j.bandl.2013.01.005]
8. Duncan LG, Seymour PHK. How do children read multisyllabic words? Some preliminary observations. J Res Read. 2003; 26(2):101–20. doi: 10.1111/1467-9817.00190 [DOI:10.1111/1467-9817.00190]
9. Campoy G. The effect of word length in short-term memory: Is rehearsal necessary. Q J Exp Psychol A. 2008; 61(5):724–34. doi: 10.1080/17470210701402364 [DOI:10.1080/17470210701402364]
10. Goswami U, Bryant P. Phonological skills and learning to read. London: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1990. [PMCID]
11. Tallberg IM, Wenneborg K, Almkvist O. Reading words with irregular decoding rules: A test of premorbid cognitive function. Scand J Psychol. 2006; 47(6):531–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2006.00547.x [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2006.00547.x]
12. Caramazza A. On drawing inferences about the structure of normal cognitive systems from the analysis of patterns of impaired performance: The case for single-patient studies. Brain Cogn. 1986; 5(1):41–66. doi: 10.1016/0278-2626(86)90061-8 [DOI:10.1016/0278-2626(86)90061-8]
13. Shallice T. From neuropsychology to mental structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1988. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511526817]
14. Schwartz MF, Saffran EM, Marin OS. The word order problem in agrammatism. Brain Lang. 1980; 10(2):249–62. doi: 10.1016/0093-934x(80)90055-3 [DOI:10.1016/0093-934X(80)90055-3]
15. Glushko RJ. The organization and activation of orthographic knowledge in reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Hum Percept Perform. 1979; 5(4):674–91. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.5.4.674 [DOI:10.1037/0096-1523.5.4.674]
16. Patterson K, Hodges JR. Deterioration of word meaning: Implications for reading. Neuropsychologia. 1992; 30(12):1025–40. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(92)90096-5 [DOI:10.1016/0028-3932(92)90096-5]
17. Graham KS, Hodges JR, Patterson K. The relationship between comprehension and oral reading in progressive fluent aphasia. Neuropsychologia. 1994; 32(3):299–316. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(94)90133-3 [DOI:10.1016/0028-3932(94)90133-3]
18. Richards TL, Grabowski TJ, Boord P, Yagle K, Askren M, Mestre Z, et al. Contrasting brain patterns of writing-related DTI parameters, fMRI connectivity, and DTI–fMRI connectivity correlations in children with and without dysgraphia or dyslexia. NeuroImage: Clin. 2015; 8:408–21. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2015.03.018 [DOI:10.1016/j.nicl.2015.03.018]
19. Shirazi TS, Nilli Pour R, Mehri A. [Study of reading and spelling skills in ordinary Persian language students taught in a combination method (Persian)]. Q J Educ. 2005; 21(1):130-13.
20. Kangarlu M, Roshan B, Delavar Kasmai H. [The studying of speech and language disorders in C.V.A. (Persian)]. J Med Counc Iran. 2014; 32(3):232-8.
21. Danaye Tous M, Baluch B. [The Effect of Transparency and Blurring of the Persian Script on the Function of Normal and Dyslexic Children in Phonological Knowledge Tests (Persian)]. J Lang Mind. 2006; 1(1):61-77.
22. Pornour F. [Active visual and auditory memory action in lexical processing (Persian)] [MSc. Thesis]. Tehran: Allameh Tabatabaei University; 2010.
23. Gholamain M, Geva E. Orthographic and cognitive factors in the concurrent development of basic reading skills in English and Persian. Lang Learn. 1999; 49(2):183–217. doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.00087 [DOI:10.1111/0023-8333.00087]
24. Arab-Moghaddam N, Senechal M. Orthographic and phonological processing skills in reading and spelling in Persian/English bilinguals. Int J Behav Dev. 2001; 25(2):140–7. doi: 10.1080/01650250042000320 [DOI:10.1080/01650250042000320]
25. Yeganeh Sh. [The effects of transparency and blurring of the Persian script on the writing skills of normal and dyslexic children through phonological awareness tests and spelling (Persian)]. Lang Sci. 2014; 2(2):71-96. doi: 10.22054/ls.2014.1081
26. Pritchard SC, Coltheart M, Palethorpe S, Castles A. Nonword reading: Comparing dual-route cascaded and connectionist dual-process models with human data. J Exp Psychol. 2012; 38(5):1268–88. doi: 10.1037/a0026703 [DOI:10.1037/a0026703]
27. Shallice T, Warrington EK, Mccarthy R. Reading without semantics. Q J Exp Psychol A: Section A. 1983; 35(1):111–38. doi: 10.1080/14640748308402120 [DOI:10.1080/14640748308402120]