4.4 Article

Phonological memory and vocabulary learning in children with focal lesions

Journal

BRAIN AND LANGUAGE
Volume 87, Issue 2, Pages 241-252

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00094-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [R01 HD051698, R01 HD023998] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDCD NIH HHS [R01 DC008524] Funding Source: Medline
  3. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [R01HD023998, R01HD051698] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DEAFNESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION DISORDERS [R01DC008524] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Eleven children with early focal lesions were compared with 70 age-matched controls to assess their performance in repeating non-words, in learning new words, and in immediate serial recall, a triad of abilities that are believed to share a dependence on serial ordering mechanisms (e.g., Baddeley, Gathercole, Papagno, 1998; Gupta, in press-a). Results for the experimental group were also compared with other assessments previously reported for the same children by MacWhinney, Feldman, Sacco, and Valdes-Nrez (2000). The children with brain injury showed substantial impairment relative to controls in the experimental tasks, in contrast with relatively unimpaired performance on measures of vocabulary and non-verbal intelligence. The relationships between word learning, non-word repetition, and immediate serial recall were similar to those observed in several other populations. These results support previous reports that there are persistent processing impairments following early brain injury, despite developmental plasticity. They also suggest that word learning, non-word repetition, and immediate serial recall may be relatively demanding tasks, and that their relationship is a fundamental aspect of the cognitive system. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available