How dual-task interference on word production is modulated by the timing of the secondary task: evidence from errors in people with aphasia

References

• Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey, D. J., & Dromey, C. (2015). Bidirectional interference between speech and nonspeech tasks in younger, middle-aged, and older adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 58(6), 1637–1653. https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_JSLHR-S-14-0083
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boiteau, T. W., Malone, P. S., Peters, S. A., & Almor, A. (2014). Interference between conversation and a concurrent visuomotor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(1), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031858
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bormann, T., Kulke, F., Wallesch, C. W., & Blanken, G. (2008). Omissions and semantic errors in aphasic naming: is there a link?. Brain and Language, 104(1), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2007.02.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodeur, M. B., Dionne-Dostie, E., Montreuil, T., & Lepage, M. (2010). The Bank of Standardized Stimuli (BOSS), a new set of 480 normative photos of objects to be used as visual stimuli in cognitive research. PloS one, 5(5), e10773.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodeur, M. B., Guérard, K., & Bouras, M. (2014). Bank of standardized stimuli (BOSS) phase II: 930 new normative photos. PloS one, 9(9), e106953.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caramazza, A. (1997). How many levels of processing are there in lexical access? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14(1), 177‑208. https://doi.org/10.1080/026432997381664
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celsi, R. L., & Olson, J. C. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of consumer research, 15(2), 210–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Q., Middleton, E., & Mirman, D. (2019). Words fail: lesion-symptom mapping of errors of omission in post-stroke aphasia. Journal of Neuropsychology, 13(2), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnp.12148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, A. E., & Meyer, A. S. (2008). Capacity demands of phoneme selection in word production: new evidence from dual-task experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(4), 886‑899. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.4.886
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93(3), 283‑321. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dell, G. S., Lawler, E. N., Harris, H. D., & Gordon, J. K. (2004). Models of errors of omission in aphasic naming. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21(2–4), 125 145. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290342000320
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erickson, R. J., Goldinger, S. D., & LaPointe, L. L. (1996). Auditory vigilance in aphasic individuals: detecting nonlinguistic stimuli with full or divided attention. Brain & Cognition, 30(2), 244–53. https://doi.org/10.1006/brcg.1996.0016. PMID: 8812002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fargier, R., & Laganaro, M. (2016). Neurophysiological modulations of non-verbal and verbal dual-tasks interference during word planning. PLOS ONE, 11(12).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fargier, R., & Laganaro, M. (2019). Interference in speaking while hearing and vice versa. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 5375. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41752-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ferreira, V. S., & Pashler, H. (2002). Central bottleneck influences on the processing stages of word production. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(6), 1187–1199. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.28.6.1187
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fournet, M., Pernon, M., Catalano Chiuvé, S., Lopez, U., & Laganaro, M. (2021). Attention in post-lexical processes of utterance production: Dual-task cost in younger and older adults. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(11), 1852–1872. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218211034130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann, N., Biran, M., & Dotan, D. (2013). Lexical retrieval and breakdown in aphasia and developmental dyslexias 32 developmental language impairment. In C. Boeckx & K. K. Grohmann (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Biolinguistics (pp. 350–374). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Garrod, S., & Pickering, M. J. (2007). Automaticity of language production in monologue and dialogue. In A. Meyer, L. Wheeldon, & A. Krott (Eds.), Automaticity and Control in Language Processing (pp. 1–21). Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Indefrey, P., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2004). The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components. Cognition, 92(1), 101‑144.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Indefrey, P. (2011). The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components: a Critical Update. Frontiers in Psychology, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 434–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemper, S., Herman, R. E., & Nartowicz, J. (2005). Different effects of dual task demands on the speech of young and older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 12(4), 340–358 .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemper, S., Schmalzried, R., Herman, R., Leedahl, S., & Mohankumar, D. (2009). The effects of aging and dual task demands on language production. Aging, Neuropsychology and Cognition, 16(3), 241–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825580802438868
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemper, S., Schmalzried, R., Herman, R., & Mohankumar, D. (2011). The effects of varying task priorities on language production by young and older adults. Experimental Aging Research, 37(2), 198–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361073X.2011.554513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laganaro, M., Bonnans, C., & Fargier, R. (2019). Word form encoding is under attentional demand: evidence from dual-task interference in aphasia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 36(1‑2), 18‑30. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2018.1564650
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laganaro, M., Morand, S., & Schnider, A. (2009). Time course of evoked-potential changes in different forms of anomia in aphasia. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(8), 1499–1510.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 76.
   Google Scholar
• Macoir, J., Gauthier, C., Jean, C., & Potvin, O. (2016). BECLA, a new assessment battery for acquired deficits of language: normative data from Quebec-French healthy younger and older adults. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 361, 220–228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCarthy, R. A., & Kartsounis, L. D. (2000). Wobbly words: refractory anomia with preserved semantics. Neurocase, 6(6), 487–497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ménétré, E. (2020). NPL: an incomplete toolkit for the researcher in NeuroPsychoLinguistic. R package version 0.0.1.19.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, L. L. (2000). The effects of varying attentional demands on the word retrieval skills of adults with aphasia, right hemisphere brain damage, or no brain damage. Brain and Language, 72(1), 40‑72. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2281.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L. (2004). Lexique 2: a new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3), 516–524.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Protopapas, A. (2007). Checkvocal: a program to facilitate checking the accuracy and response time of vocal responses from DMDX. Behavior Research Methods, 39(4), 859–862.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, M., & Besner, D. (2006). Reading aloud is not automatic: processing capacity is required to generate a phonological code from print. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(6), 1303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roelofs, A. (2008). Attention to spoken word planning: chronometric and neuroimaging evidence. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2(3), 389‑405. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00060.x
   Google Scholar
• Schnur, T. T., M. F. Schwartz, A. Brecher, & C. Hodgson. 2006. Semantic interference during blocked-cyclic naming: evidence from aphasia. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 199–227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schriefers, H., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. (1990). Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: picture-word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(1), 86–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, M. F., & Brecher, A. (2000). A model-driven analysis of severity, response characteristics, and partial recovery in aphasics’ picture naming. Brain and Language, 73, 62–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields, L. W., & Balota, D. A. (1991). Repetition and associative context effects in speech production. Language and Speech, 34 (Pt 1), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099103400103
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Welford, A. T. (1952). The ‘psychological refractory period’ and the timing of high-speed performance — a review and a theory. British Journal of Psychology. General Section, 43(1), 2‑19.
   Google Scholar
• Zomeren, A. H., & Brouwer, W. H. (1994). Clinical Neuropsychology of Attention. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar