Inference generation during text comprehension by adults with right hemisphere brain damage: activation failure versus multiple activation.

Evidence conflicts as to whether adults with right hemisphere brain damage (RHD) generate inferences during text comprehension. M. Beeman (1993) reported that adults with RHD fail to activate the lexical-semantic bases of routine bridging inferences, which are necessary for comprehension. But other evidence indicates that adults with RHD activate multiple interpretations in various comprehension domains. In addition, the activation of contextually inappropriate interpretations is prolonged for many adults with RHD and predicts poor discourse comprehension. This study contrasted Beeman's activation failure hypothesis with the prediction that adults with RHD would generate multiple interpretations in text comprehension. The relation between activation of textually incompatible inferences and discourse comprehension was also investigated for this group. Thirty-seven adults with RHD and 34 without brain damage listened to brief narratives that required a bridging inference (BI) to integrate the text-final sentence. This final sentence, when isolated from its text, was strongly biased toward a contextually incompatible alternate interpretation (AI). Auditory phoneme strings were presented for lexical decision immediately after each text's initial and final sentence. Adults with RHD were both faster and more accurate in making lexical decisions to BI-related target words in final-sentence position than in initial-sentence position. Thus, contrary to the activation failure hypothesis, adults with RHD generated the lexical-semantic foundations of BIs where they were required by the text. AI generation was evident in accuracy data as well, but not in response time data. This result is partially consistent with the multiple activation view. Finally, greater activation for contextually incompatible interpretations was associated with poorer discourse comprehension performance by adults with RHD.

[1]  J. Rueckl,et al.  When pseudowords acquire meaning: Effect of semantic associations on pseudoword repetition priming. , 1993 .

[2]  M. Just,et al.  The psychology of reading and language comprehension , 1986 .

[3]  David Swinney,et al.  Gap-Filling and End-of-Sentence Effects in Real-Time Language Processing: Implications for Modeling Sentence Comprehension in Aphasia , 1998, Brain and Language.

[4]  A. Baumgaertner,et al.  The Nature and Implications of Right Hemisphere Language Disorders: Issues in Search of Answers , 2002 .

[5]  K. Rayner Eye movements in reading and information processing. , 1978, Psychological bulletin.

[6]  H. Gardner,et al.  The role of the right hemisphere in the apprehension of complex linguistic materials , 1981, Brain and Language.

[7]  Mark Beeman,et al.  Coarse semantic coding and discourse comprehension. , 1998 .

[8]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Inference during reading. , 1992 .

[9]  C. Tompkins,et al.  Interpreting Intended Meanings after Right Hemisphere Brain Damage: An Analysis of Evidence, Potential Accounts, and Clinical Implications , 1998 .

[10]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[11]  Morton Ann Gernsbacher,et al.  Language Comprehension As Structure Building , 1990 .

[12]  S. Folstein,et al.  "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. , 1975, Journal of psychiatric research.

[13]  Jerome L. Myers,et al.  Accessing the discourse representation during reading , 1998 .

[14]  L. Postman,et al.  Norms of word association , 1970 .

[15]  James J. Jenkins,et al.  Word Association Norms: Grade School Through College , 1964 .

[16]  T. Campbell,et al.  Nonword repetition and child language impairment. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[17]  J. D. Murray,et al.  Forward Inferences: From Activation to Long-Term Memory. , 1999 .

[18]  Gregory G. Brown,et al.  The problem of premorbid intelligence in neuropsychological assessment , 1979 .

[19]  M. Beeman Semantic Processing in the Right Hemisphere May Contribute to Drawing Inferences from Discourse , 1993, Brain and Language.

[20]  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.

[21]  M. Gernsbacher,et al.  The mechanism of suppression: a component of general comprehension skill. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  Manuel G. Calvo,et al.  Predictive inferences occur on‐line, but with delay: Convergence of naming and reading times , 1996 .

[23]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Dimensions of Inference , 1990 .

[24]  M. Strauss,et al.  Contextual influences on comprehension of multiple-meaning words by right hemisphere brain-damaged and non-brain-damaged adults , 1997 .

[25]  Mark F. Bradshaw,et al.  Individual Differences in Reading and Eye Movement Control , 1998 .

[26]  W. Kintsch The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. , 1988, Psychological review.

[27]  S. Blumstein,et al.  On-Line Processing of Filler–Gap Constructions in Aphasia , 1998, Brain and Language.

[28]  A. Baumgaertner,et al.  Clinical Value of Online Measures for Adults With Right Hemisphere Brain Damage , 1998 .

[29]  A. Baumgaertner,et al.  Mechanisms of discourse comprehension impairment after right hemisphere brain damage: suppression in inferential ambiguity resolution. , 2000, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

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

[31]  T. Trabasso,et al.  Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. , 1994 .

[32]  Penelope S. Myers,et al.  Inference Failure: The Underlying Impairment in Right-Hemisphere Communication Disorders , 1991 .

[33]  Lorraine K. Tyler,et al.  Spoken language comprehension : an experimental approach to disordered and normal processing , 1992 .

[34]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Time course of priming for associate and inference words in a discourse context , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[35]  G. Stone,et al.  Strategic control of processing in word recognition. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[36]  D. Swinney,et al.  Online Examination of Language Performance in Normal and Neurologically Impaired Adults , 1998 .

[37]  E. Harford,et al.  Hearing Status of Ambulatory Senior Citizens , 1982, Ear and hearing.

[38]  J. Grafman,et al.  Summation Priming and Coarse Semantic Coding in the Right Hemisphere , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[39]  A. Baumgaertner,et al.  Working memory and inference revision in brain-damaged and normally aging adults. , 1994, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[40]  Shari R Baum,et al.  Sensitivity to local sentence context information in lexical ambiguity resolution: Evidence from left- and right-hemisphere-damaged individuals , 2003, Brain and Language.

[41]  C. Tompkins,et al.  Predictive inferencing in adults with right hemisphere brain damage. , 2001, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[42]  Marc D. Pell,et al.  The Effect of Compressed Speech on the Ability of Right-Hemisphere-Damaged Patients to Use Context , 2001, Cortex.

[43]  Connie A. Tompkins,et al.  Inferencing in adults with right hemisphere brain damage: An analysis of conflicting results , 2000 .

[44]  M. Gernsbacher,et al.  Investigating differences in general comprehension skill. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.