↓ Skip to main content

Selection Processing in Noun and Verb Production in Left- and Right-Sided Parkinson's Disease Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Selection Processing in Noun and Verb Production in Left- and Right-Sided Parkinson's Disease Patients
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01241
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonia Di Tella, Francesca Baglio, Monia Cabinio, Raffaello Nemni, Daniela Traficante, Maria C. Silveri

Abstract

Verbs are more difficult to produce than nouns. Thus, if executive resources are reduced as in Parkinson's disease (PD), verbs are penalized compared to nouns. However, in an experimental condition in which it is the noun that must be selected from a larger number of alternatives compared to the verb, it is the noun production that becomes slower and more prone to errors. Indeed, patients are slower and less accurate than normal subjects when required to produce nouns from verbs (VN) in a morphology derivation tasks (e.g., "osservazione" from "osservare") ["observation" from "observe"] than verbs from nouns in a morphology generation task, in which only a verb can be generated from the noun (NV) (e.g., "fallire" from "fallimento") ["to fail" from "failure"]. In the Italian language morphology, in fact, generation and derivation tasks differ in the number of lexical entries among which the response must be selected. The left Inferior Frontal Gyrus (IFG) has been demonstrated to be involved in selection processes. In the present study, we explored if the ability to select words is related to the cortical thickness of the left IFG. Twelve right-sided PD with nigrostriatal hypofunctionality in the left hemisphere (RPD-LH), 9 left-sided PD with nigrostriatal hypofunctionality in the right hemisphere (LPD-RH) and 19 healthy controls (HC) took part in the study. NV and VN production tasks were administered; accuracy and reaction times (RTs) were collected. All 40 subjects received a structural MRI examination. Cortical thickness of the IFG and volumetric measurements for subcortical regions, thought to support selection processes, were computed using FreeSurfer. In VN derivation tasks RPD-LH patients were less accurate than LPD-RH patients (accuracy: 66% vs. 77%). No difference emerged among the three groups in RTs. Task accuracy/RTs and IFG thickness showed a significant correlation only in RPD-LH. Not only nouns (as expected) but also verbs were correlated with cortical thickness. This suggests that the linguistic nature of the stimuli along with executive resources are both relevant during word selection processes. Our data confirm that executive resources and language interact in the left IFG in word production tasks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 19%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 9 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 7 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Linguistics 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 11 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,981,442
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,886
of 30,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,681
of 328,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#579
of 723 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,473 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 328,918 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 723 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.