Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task

The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Corianne Rogalsky [verfasserIn] Kuan-Hua Chen [verfasserIn] Hanna Damasio [verfasserIn] Tracy Love [verfasserIn] Greg Hickok [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2015

Schlagwörter:	Aphasia sentence comprehension speech comprehension VLSM agrammatism

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Frontiers in Psychology - Frontiers Media S.A., 2010, 6(2015)
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:6 ; year:2015

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ043524672

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ043524672
003	DE-627
005	20230308072552.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230227s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ043524672
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a BF1-990
100	0		\|a Corianne Rogalsky \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task
264		1	\|c 2015
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks.
650		4	\|a Aphasia
650		4	\|a sentence comprehension
650		4	\|a speech comprehension
650		4	\|a VLSM
650		4	\|a agrammatism
653		0	\|a Psychology
700	0		\|a Kuan-Hua Chen \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Hanna Damasio \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Tracy Love \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Greg Hickok \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Frontiers in Psychology \|d Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 \|g 6(2015) \|w (DE-627)631495711 \|w (DE-600)2563826-9 \|x 16641078 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:6 \|g year:2015
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_32
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_90
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_100
912			\|a GBV_ILN_101
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_138
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_152
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_187
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_250
912			\|a GBV_ILN_281
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_647
912			\|a GBV_ILN_702
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2086
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 6 \|j 2015

Indexfelder

author_variant	c r cr k h c khc h d hd t l tl g h gh
matchkey_str	article:16641078:2015----::aaeorcsrarhatrotmoalbiipiaeisrkidcdgamtc
hierarchy_sort_str	2015
callnumber-subject-code	BF
publishDate	2015
allfields	10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 doi (DE-627)DOAJ043524672 (DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 Corianne Rogalsky verfasserin aut Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks. Aphasia sentence comprehension speech comprehension VLSM agrammatism Psychology Kuan-Hua Chen verfasserin aut Hanna Damasio verfasserin aut Tracy Love verfasserin aut Greg Hickok verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015
spelling	10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 doi (DE-627)DOAJ043524672 (DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 Corianne Rogalsky verfasserin aut Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks. Aphasia sentence comprehension speech comprehension VLSM agrammatism Psychology Kuan-Hua Chen verfasserin aut Hanna Damasio verfasserin aut Tracy Love verfasserin aut Greg Hickok verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015
allfields_unstemmed	10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 doi (DE-627)DOAJ043524672 (DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 Corianne Rogalsky verfasserin aut Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks. Aphasia sentence comprehension speech comprehension VLSM agrammatism Psychology Kuan-Hua Chen verfasserin aut Hanna Damasio verfasserin aut Tracy Love verfasserin aut Greg Hickok verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015
allfieldsGer	10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 doi (DE-627)DOAJ043524672 (DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 Corianne Rogalsky verfasserin aut Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks. Aphasia sentence comprehension speech comprehension VLSM agrammatism Psychology Kuan-Hua Chen verfasserin aut Hanna Damasio verfasserin aut Tracy Love verfasserin aut Greg Hickok verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015
allfieldsSound	10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 doi (DE-627)DOAJ043524672 (DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 Corianne Rogalsky verfasserin aut Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks. Aphasia sentence comprehension speech comprehension VLSM agrammatism Psychology Kuan-Hua Chen verfasserin aut Hanna Damasio verfasserin aut Tracy Love verfasserin aut Greg Hickok verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015
language	English
source	In Frontiers in Psychology 6(2015) volume:6 year:2015
sourceStr	In Frontiers in Psychology 6(2015) volume:6 year:2015
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Aphasia sentence comprehension speech comprehension VLSM agrammatism Psychology
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Frontiers in Psychology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Corianne Rogalsky @@aut@@ Kuan-Hua Chen @@aut@@ Hanna Damasio @@aut@@ Tracy Love @@aut@@ Greg Hickok @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2015-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	631495711
id	DOAJ043524672
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ043524672</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308072552.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ043524672</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">BF1-990</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Corianne Rogalsky</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Aphasia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">sentence comprehension</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">speech comprehension</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">VLSM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">agrammatism</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Psychology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kuan-Hua Chen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hanna Damasio</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tracy Love</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Greg Hickok</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Psychology</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2010</subfield><subfield code="g">6(2015)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)631495711</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2563826-9</subfield><subfield code="x">16641078</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:6</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_647</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">6</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	B - Philosophy, Psychology, Religion
author	Corianne Rogalsky
spellingShingle	Corianne Rogalsky misc BF1-990 misc Aphasia misc sentence comprehension misc speech comprehension misc VLSM misc agrammatism misc Psychology Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task
authorStr	Corianne Rogalsky
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)631495711
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	BF1-990
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	16641078
topic_title	BF1-990 Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task Aphasia sentence comprehension speech comprehension VLSM agrammatism
topic	misc BF1-990 misc Aphasia misc sentence comprehension misc speech comprehension misc VLSM misc agrammatism misc Psychology
topic_unstemmed	misc BF1-990 misc Aphasia misc sentence comprehension misc speech comprehension misc VLSM misc agrammatism misc Psychology
topic_browse	misc BF1-990 misc Aphasia misc sentence comprehension misc speech comprehension misc VLSM misc agrammatism misc Psychology
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Frontiers in Psychology
hierarchy_parent_id	631495711
hierarchy_top_title	Frontiers in Psychology
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9
title	Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ043524672 (DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c
title_full	Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task
author_sort	Corianne Rogalsky
journal	Frontiers in Psychology
journalStr	Frontiers in Psychology
callnumber-first-code	B
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2015
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Corianne Rogalsky Kuan-Hua Chen Hanna Damasio Tracy Love Greg Hickok
container_volume	6
class	BF1-990
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Corianne Rogalsky
doi_str_mv	10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	damage to broca’s area or the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task
callnumber	BF1-990
title_auth	Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task
abstract	The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks.
abstractGer	The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks.
abstract_unstemmed	The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task
url	https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077 https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078
remote_bool	true
author2	Kuan-Hua Chen Hanna Damasio Tracy Love Greg Hickok
author2Str	Kuan-Hua Chen Hanna Damasio Tracy Love Greg Hickok
ppnlink	631495711
callnumber-subject	BF - Psychology
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077
callnumber-a	BF1-990
up_date	2024-07-03T18:02:09.886Z
_version_	1803581894044942336
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ043524672</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308072552.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ043524672</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJd8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">BF1-990</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Corianne Rogalsky</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The neurobiology of sentence comprehension remains unresolved. Previous large-scale studies of stroke patients have yielded conflicting results regarding sentence comprehension, implicating inferior frontal, anterior temporal and/or posterior temporal regions (Dronkers et al., 2004; Magnusdottir et al., 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012). Furthermore, only one large-scale lesion study (Magnusdottir et al. 2013) has examined the neural underpinnings of agrammatic comprehension (i.e. substantially worse performance on sentences with noncanonical word orders compared to canonical word order sentences in English), a hallmark of Broca’s aphasia. This one previous study of noncanonical < canonical sentence performance on a sentence picture-matching task implicated damage to the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) and to a lesser degree Broca’s area damage (i.e. < 10% of significant voxels) (Magnusdottir et al. 2013). The present study investigated the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension with two sentence comprehension tasks in the MARC test battery: a sentence-picture matching task (the SOAP Test: a test of syntactic complexity; Love & Oster, 2002) and a sentence plausibility judgment task. Each task contained active, passive, subject-relative and object-relative sentences. Participants included 91 patients with chronic focal cerebral damage. First, we conducted voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM; Bates et al. 2003) for each sentence type in each task. Consistent with previous studies (Magnusdottir et al. 2013; Thothathiri et al. 2012), the VLSMs identified a significant association between sentence comprehension impairments and damage to a large left temporal-inferior parietal network for all sentences (peak t values were in posterior temporal and inferior parietal voxels); no areas of frontal lobe damage were significant for any sentence type/task. We then conducted VLSMs to identify areas of damage associated specifically with agrammatic comprehension in each task. Agrammatic comprehension was indexed as the difference in performance of each patient between subject relative and object relative sentences. VLSMs using these indices identified that agrammatic comprehension in each task was associated with damage to different brain regions: In the sentence-picture matching task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left putamen, external capsule and adjacent white matter underlying the left inferior frontal gyrus and left precentral gyrus. Conversely in the plausibility judgment task, agrammatic comprehension was associated with damage in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus. Thus agrammatic comprehension indexed using different tasks localized to different lesion patterns. Our findings suggest that the neurobiology of agrammatic comprehension is task-dependent. These results also provide possible neural bases for the behavioral dissociations between sentence comprehension and grammaticality judgment impairments that have been reported in patients with aphasia (Linebarger et al. 1983; Wulfeck, 1988), although grammaticality and plausibility judgments are certainly different computational tasks.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Aphasia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">sentence comprehension</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">speech comprehension</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">VLSM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">agrammatism</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Psychology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kuan-Hua Chen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hanna Damasio</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tracy Love</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Greg Hickok</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Psychology</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2010</subfield><subfield code="g">6(2015)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)631495711</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2563826-9</subfield><subfield code="x">16641078</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:6</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/d8748d6b34eb43ffa39c8073c654b62c</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2015.65.00077/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_647</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">6</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3985004

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Damage to Broca’s area OR the anterior temporal lobe is implicated in stroke-induced agrammatic comprehension: it depends on the task

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?