↓ Skip to main content

An fMRI investigation of the effects of attempted naming on word retrieval in aphasia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An fMRI investigation of the effects of attempted naming on word retrieval in aphasia
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00291
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shiree Heath, Katie L. McMahon, Lyndsey A. Nickels, Anthony Angwin, Anna D. MacDonald, Sophia van Hees, Eril McKinnon, Kori Johnson, David A. Copland

Abstract

In healthy controls, picture naming performance can be facilitated by a single prior exposure to the same picture ("priming"). This priming phenomenon is utilized in the treatment of aphasia, which often includes repeated picture naming as part of a therapeutic task. The current study sought to determine whether single and/or multiple exposures facilitate subsequent naming in aphasia and whether such facilitatory effects act through normal priming mechanisms. A functional magnetic resonance imaging paradigm was employed to explore the beneficial effects of attempted naming in two individuals with aphasia and a control group. The timing and number of prior exposures was manipulated, with investigation of both short-term effects (single prior exposure over a period of minutes) and long-term effects (multiple presentations over a period of days). Following attempted naming, both short-term and long-term facilitated items showed improvement for controls, while only the long-term condition showed benefits at a behavioral level for the participants with aphasia. At a neural level, effects of long-term facilitation were noted in the left precuneus for one participant with aphasia, a result also identified for the equivalent contrast in controls. It appears that multiple attempts are required to improve naming performance in the presence of anomia and that for some individuals with aphasia the source of facilitation may be similar to unimpaired mechanisms engaged outside the language network.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 41 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Student > Master 8 18%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 36%
Linguistics 4 9%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 11 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 May 2015.
All research outputs
#15,282,677
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,198
of 7,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,845
of 266,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#136
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,147 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,750 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.