Effects of Right and Left Hemisphere Damage on Performance of the “Right Hemisphere Communication Battery”

A Hebrew adaptation of Gardner and Brownell's (1986) "Right Hemisphere Communication Battery" (HRHCB) was administered to 27 right brain-damaged (RBD) patients, 31 left brain-damaged (LBD) patients, and 21 age-matched normal controls. Both patient groups showed deficits relative to controls and overall there was no difference between the two patient groups. A factor analysis of patients' scores on the HRHCB yielded two interpretable factors, a verbal and a nonverbal one. These factors were not lateralized. Performance of patients on the HRHCB correlated significantly and positively with performance on most tests of basic language functions, measured with a Hebrew adaptation of the "Western Aphasia Battery" (HWAB) and with other cognitive functions measured with standardized neuropsychological tests. There were stronger correlations of HRHCB with subtests of the HWAB in LBD patients and with nonlanguage cognitive tests in RBD patients. In the LBD group, HRHCB subtests' scores correlated negatively with lesion extent in frontal and temporal perisylvian regions. Such localization was not observed in RBD patients. The results argue against selective right hemisphere (RH) involvement in the RHCB, alleged to measure pragmatic aspects of language use, and show, instead, bilateral involvement. The results also argue against a modular organization of these functions of language use, especially in the RH.

[1]  H. Brownell,et al.  Cerebral Lateralization and Theory of Mind , 2000 .

[2]  J. Talairach,et al.  Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain: 3-Dimensional Proportional System: An Approach to Cerebral Imaging , 1988 .

[3]  William Hirst,et al.  Constraints on the processing of indirect speech acts: Evidence from aphasiology , 1984, Brain and Language.

[4]  H. Gardner,et al.  Inference deficits in right brain-damaged patients , 1986, Brain and Language.

[5]  Andrew Kertesz,et al.  Aphasia and Associated Disorders: Taxonomy, Localization and Recovery , 1979 .

[6]  D. Zaidel,et al.  The Interpretation of Sentence Ambiguity in Patients with Unilateral Focal Brain Surgery , 1995, Brain and Language.

[7]  E. Ross,et al.  The aprosodias. Functional-anatomic organization of the affective components of language in the right hemisphere. , 1981, Archives of neurology.

[8]  H. Gardner,et al.  Appreciation of indirect requests by left- and right-brain-damaged patients: The effects of verbal context and conventionality of wording , 1989, Brain and Language.

[9]  H. Brownell,et al.  Discourse ability and brain damage : theoretical and empirical perspectives , 1990 .

[10]  R. Giora.  Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis , 1997 .

[11]  Y. Joanette,et al.  Production and Evaluation of Requests by Right Hemisphere Brain-Damaged Individuals , 1994, Brain and Language.

[12]  H. Gardner,et al.  9 – Missing the Point: The Role of the Right Hemisphere in the Processing of Complex Linguistic Materials1 , 1983 .

[13]  C. Reynolds,et al.  Wechsler memory scale-revised , 1988 .

[14]  N. Foldi,et al.  Appreciation of pragmatic interpretations of indirect commands: Comparison of right and left hemisphere brain-damaged patients , 1987, Brain and Language.

[15]  A. Schweiger,et al.  Processing of lexical ambiguity in patients with traumatic brain injury , 1998, Journal of Neurolinguistics.

[16]  Howard Gardner,et al.  Comprehension of humorous and nonhumorous materials by left and right brain-damaged patients , 1986, Brain and Cognition.

[17]  H. Kirshner,et al.  Affective prosodic disturbance subsequent to right hemisphere stroke: A clinical application , 1998, Journal of Neurolinguistics.

[18]  H. Brownell.  The neuropsychology of narrative comprehension , 1988 .

[19]  H. Gardner,et al.  Comprehension and appreciation of humorous material following brain damage. , 1975, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[20]  A. Kasher,et al.  Hemispheric Memory for Surrealistic Versus Realistic Paintings , 1989, Cortex.

[21]  W. Hartje,et al.  Influence of Contextual Complexity on the Processing of Cartoons by Patients with Unilateral Lesions , 1985, Cortex.

[22]  H. Gardner,et al.  The comprehension of metaphor in brain-damaged patients. , 1977, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[23]  Harry A. Whitaker,et al.  Contemporary reviews in neuropsychology , 1988 .

[24]  A. Benton.  Contributions to Neuropsychological Assessment: A Clinical Manual , 1983 .

[25]  H. Gardner,et al.  Humor and the Right Hemisphere: A Narrative Perspective , 1988 .

[26]  Howard Gardner,et al.  Appreciation of metaphoric alternative word meanings by left and right brain-damaged patients , 1990, Neuropsychologia.

[27]  S. McDonald.  Pragmatic Language Skills after Closed Head Injury: Ability to Meet the Informational Needs of the Listener , 1993, Brain and Language.

[28]  G. Kasper,et al.  Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies , 1991 .

[29]  B. Stemmer.  A Pragmatic Approach to Neurolinguistics: Requests (Re)Considered , 1994, Brain and Language.

[30]  J. Stroop.  Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. , 1992 .

[31]  L. Leonard,et al.  Aphasics' comprehension of contextually conveyed meaning , 1978, Brain and Language.

[32]  Asa Kasher,et al.  Differential Effects of Right- and Left-Hemisphere Damage on Understanding Sarcasm and Metaphor , 2000 .

[33]  C. Tompkins,et al.  The access and processing of familiar idioms by brain-damaged and normally aging adults. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[34]  A. Kasher,et al.  Effects of Right- and Left-Hemisphere Damage on Understanding Conversational Implicatures , 1999, Brain and Language.

[35]  Howard Gardner,et al.  Pragmatic Aspects of Communication in Brain-Damaged Patients**We wish to acknowledge the support of the National Institute of Neurological and Communication Disorders and Stroke (M 11408), the Veterans Administration and Harvard Project Zero. , 1983 .

[36]  C. Tompkins.  Knowledge and strategies for processing lexical metaphor after right or left hemisphere brain damage. , 1990, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[37]  Howard Gardner,et al.  Surprise but not coherence: Sensitivity to verbal humor in right-hemisphere patients , 1983, Brain and Language.

[38]  Joan C. Borod,et al.  Cerebral mechanisms underlying facial, prosodic, and lexical emotional expression: A review of neuropsychological studies and methodological issues. , 1993 .

[39]  Yo Matsumoto.  Subjective motion and English and Japanese verbs , 1996 .

[40]  D. Stuss,et al.  Humour appreciation: a role of the right frontal lobe. , 1999, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[41]  Walter Huber,et al.  Text Comprehension and Production in Aphasia: Analysis in Terms of Micro- and Macroprocessing , 1990 .

[42]  K. Emmorey,et al.  The neurological substrates for prosodic aspects of speech , 1987, Brain and Language.

[43]  H. Gardner,et al.  The effects of right hemisphere damage on the pragmatic interpretation of conversational remarks , 1990, Brain and Language.