Distinct loci of lexical and semantic access deficits in aphasia: Evidence from voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping and diffusion tensor imaging

dc.citation.firstpage37en_US
dc.citation.journalTitleCortexen_US
dc.citation.lastpage58en_US
dc.citation.volumeNumber67en_US
dc.contributor.authorHarvey, Denise Y.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSchnur, Tatiana T.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2015-06-15T18:57:50Zen_US
dc.date.available2015-06-15T18:57:50Zen_US
dc.date.issued2015en_US
dc.description.abstractNaming pictures and matching words to pictures belonging to the same semantic category negatively affects language production and comprehension. By most accounts, semantic interference arises when accessing lexical representations in naming (e.g., Damian, Vigliocco, & Levelt, 2001) and semantic representations in comprehension (e.g., Forde & Humphreys, 1997). Further, damage to the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG), a region implicated in cognitive control, results in increasing semantic interference when items repeat across cycles in both language production and comprehension (Jefferies, Baker, Doran, & Lambon Ralph, 2007). This generates the prediction that the LIFG via white matter connections supports resolution of semantic interference arising from different loci (lexical vsᅠsemantic) in the temporal lobe. However, it remains unclear whether the cognitive and neural mechanisms that resolve semantic interference are the same across tasks. Thus, we examined which gray matter structures [using whole brain and region of interest (ROI) approaches] and white matter connections (using deterministic tractography) when damaged impact semantic interference and its increase across cycles when repeatedly producing and understanding words in 15 speakers with varying lexical-semantic deficits from left hemisphere stroke. We found that damage to distinct brain regions, the posterior versusᅠanterior temporal lobe, was associated with semantic interference (collapsed across cycles) in naming and comprehension, respectively. Further, those with LIFG damage compared to those without exhibited marginally larger increases in semantic interference across cycles in naming but not comprehension. Lastly, the inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, connecting the LIFG with posterior temporal lobe, related to semantic interference in naming, whereas the inferior longitudinal fasciculus (ILF), connecting posterior with anterior temporal regions related to semantic interference in comprehension. These neuroanatomical-behavioral findings have implications for models of the lexical-semantic language network by demonstrating that semantic interference in language production and comprehension involves different representations which differentially recruit a cognitive control mechanism for interference resolution.en_US
dc.identifier.citationHarvey, Denise Y. and Schnur, Tatiana T.. "Distinct loci of lexical and semantic access deficits in aphasia: Evidence from voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping and diffusion tensor imaging." <i>Cortex,</i> 67, (2015) Elsevier: 37-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.004.en_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.004en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1911/80762en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rightsThis is an author's peer-reviewed final manuscript, as accepted by the publisher. The published article is copyrighted by Elsevier.en_US
dc.subject.keyworddiffusion tensor imagingen_US
dc.subject.keywordlanguage production and comprehensionen_US
dc.subject.keywordlexical-semantic deficitsen_US
dc.subject.keywordsemantic interferenceen_US
dc.subject.keywordlesion-symptom mappingen_US
dc.titleDistinct loci of lexical and semantic access deficits in aphasia: Evidence from voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping and diffusion tensor imagingen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.dcmiTexten_US
dc.type.publicationpost-printen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
HarveySchnur_Cortex_InPress.pdf
Size:
1.36 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: