Strategy Implementation During Abstract Nonlinguistic Category Learning in Aphasia (Vallila-Rohter & Kiran, 2015)
收藏asha.figshare.com2023-05-30 更新2025-03-25 收录
下载链接:
https://asha.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Strategy_Implementation_During_Abstract_Nonlinguistic_Category_Learning_in_Aphasia_Vallila-Rohter_Kiran_2015_/6170330/1
下载链接
链接失效反馈官方服务:
资源简介:
Purpose Our purpose was to study strategy use during nonlinguistic category learning in aphasia.
Method Twelve control participants without aphasia and 53 participants with aphasia (PWA) completed a computerized feedback-based category learning task consisting of training and testing phases. Accuracy rates of categorization in testing phases were calculated. To evaluate strategy use, strategy analyses were conducted over training and testing phases. Participant data were compared with model data that simulated complex multi-cue, single feature, and random pattern strategies. Learning success and strategy use were evaluated within the context of standardized cognitive–linguistic assessments.
Results Categorization accuracy was higher among control participants than among PWA. The majority of control participants implemented suboptimal or optimal multi-cue and single-feature strategies by testing phases of the experiment. In contrast, a large subgroup of PWA implemented random patterns, or no strategy, during both training and testing phases of the experiment.
Conclusions Person-to-person variability arises not only in category learning ability but also in the strategies implemented to complete category learning tasks. PWA less frequently developed effective strategies during category learning tasks than control participants. Certain PWA may have impairments of strategy development or feedback processing not captured by language and currently probed cognitive abilities.
研究目的 本研究的目的是探究非语言范畴学习过程中失语症患者在策略运用上的情况。研究方法 在本研究中,12名无失语症的控制参与者与53名失语症患者(PWA)共同完成了一项基于计算机反馈的范畴学习任务,该任务包括训练阶段和测试阶段。计算了测试阶段中的分类准确率。为了评估策略的使用,我们对训练阶段和测试阶段进行了策略分析。将参与者的数据与模拟复杂多线索、单一特征和随机模式策略的模型数据进行比较。在学习成功度和策略运用方面,均在标准化的认知-语言评估的背景下进行评估。研究结果 控制参与者在分类准确率上高于失语症患者。在实验的测试阶段,大多数控制参与者实施了次优或最优的多线索和单一特征策略。相反,在实验的训练和测试阶段,一大群失语症患者实施了随机模式或未采取任何策略。结论 个人在范畴学习能力和实施范畴学习任务的策略上均存在个体差异。与控制参与者相比,失语症患者在学习任务中开发有效策略的频率较低。某些失语症患者可能存在策略开发或反馈处理方面的损害,而这些损害并未被语言和当前探究的认知能力所捕捉。
提供机构:
asha.figshare.com



