Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T11:29:11.295Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Verbal comprehension deficits after right hemisphere damage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Daniel B. Hier and
Joni Kaplan
Daniel B. Hier*
Affiliation:
Michael Reese Hospital, Chicago
Joni Kaplan
Affiliation:
Kennedy Memorial Hospital, Boston
*
Daniel B. Hier, M.D., Department of Neurology, Michael Reese Hospital, Chicago, IL 60616
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We have compared the verbal comprehension abilities of 34 right hemisphere damaged patients to 16 hospitalized control subjects of comparable age and educational attainment. The right hemisphere damaged patients performed as well as the control subjects on a vocabulary test, but were impaired in their ability to interpret proverbs and comprehend logico-grammatical sentences. Impairment on the proverbs test was the result of a decrease in the number of abstract interpretations, whereas impairment on the logico-grammatical sentence comprehension test was related to difficultes in grasping spatial and passive relationships. These comprehension impairments tended to correlate with visuospatial deficits and hemianopia, but not with the degree of hemiparesis or the presence of sensory extinction. Patients with anterior right hemisphere damage performed better on the logico-grammatical sentence conprehension test than patients with posterior damage. A variety of factors probably contribute to these verbal deficits including impaired intellect, inattention, an inability to grasp spatial relationships, and difficulties in manipulating the inner schemata of language.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , August 1980, pp. 279 - 294
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Adams, R. D., & Victor, M.Principles of neurology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1977.Google Scholar
Archibald, T. M., & Wepman, J. M.Language disturbances and non-verbal cognitive performance in eight patients following injury to the right hemisphere. Brain, 1968, 91, 117–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, A. J.Manual for Southern California Sensory Integration Tests. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services, 1972.Google Scholar
Bender, M. B.Extinction and other patterns of sensory interraction. Advances in Neurology. 1977, 18, 107–10.Google Scholar
Birren, J. E., & Morrison, D. F.Analysis of the WAIS subtests in relation to age and education. Journal of Gerontology, 1961, 16, 363–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, J. W., Hécaen, H.Lateralization and language representation. Neurology 1976, 26, 183–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caramazza, A., Gordon, J., Zurif, E. B., & DeLuca, D.Right-hemispheric damage and verbal problem solving behavior. Brain and Language, 1976, 3, 41–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Critchley, M. Speech and speech-loss in relation to the duality of the brain. In Mountcastle, V. B. (Ed.), Interhemispheric relations and cerebral dominance, 208–13. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
DeRenzi, E., & Nichelli, P.Verbal and non-verbal short-term memory impairment following hemispheric damage. Cortex, 1975, 11, 341–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimond, S. J.Performance by split-brain humans on lateralized vigilance tasks. Cortex, 1979, 14, 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, W. J.BMDP biomedical computer programs. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Eisenson, J.Language and intellectual modifications associated with right cerebral damage. Language and Speech, 1962, 5, 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, K.Language and language disorders. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1948.Google Scholar
Gorham, D. R.Clinical manual for the Proverbs Test. Missoula, Mont.: Psychological Test Specialists, 1956.Google Scholar
Hécaen, H. Clinical symptomology in right and left hemisphere lesions. In Mountcastle, V. B. (Ed.), Interhemispheric relations and cerebral dominance, 215–43. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Hécean, H., & Albert, M. L.Human neuropsychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1978.Google Scholar
Hier, D. B., Mogil, S. I., Rubin, N. P., & Komros, G. R.Semantic aphasia: A neglected entity. Brain and Language, 1980, 10, 120–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huttenlocher, J. Language and thought. In Miller, G. A. (Ed.), Communication, language, and meaning, 172–84. New York: Basic Books, 1972.Google Scholar
Klonoff, H., Kennedy, M.A comparative study of cognitive functioning in old age. Journal of Gerontology, 1966, 21, 239–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen, B., Skinjøh, E., & Lassen, M. A.Variations in regional cortical blood flow in the right and left hemispheres during automatic speech. Brain, 1978, 101, 193–209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lezak, M. D.Neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press, 1976.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R.Traumatic aphasia. The Hague: Mouton, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luria, A. R.The working brain. New York: Basic Books, 1973.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R., Naydin, F. L., Tsvetkova, L. S., Vinarskaya, E. N.Restoration of higher cortical function following local brain damage. Handbook of Clinical Neurology, 1969, 3, 368–433.Google Scholar
Marcie, P., Hécaen, H., Dubois, J., & Angerlergues, R.Les troubles de la realisation de la parole au cours des lesions de l'hemisphere droit. Neuropsychologia, 1965, 3, 217–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milner, B.Disorders of learning and memory after temporal-lobe lesions in man. Clinical Neurosurgery, 1972, 19, 421–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penfield, W., & Roberts, L.Speech and brain mechanisms. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1959.Google Scholar
Swisher, L. P., & Sarno, M. T.Token test scores of three matched patient groups: Left brain-damaged with aphasia, right brain-damaged without aphasia, non-brain-damaged. Cortex, 1969, 5, 264–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wechsler, D.Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. New York: Psychological Corporation, 1955.Google Scholar
Wiig, E. H., & Semel, E. M.Development of comprehension of logico-grammatical sentences by grade school children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1974, 39, 171–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winner, E. & Gardner, H.The comprehension of metaphor in brain damaged patients. Brain, 1977, 100, 717–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zaidel, E.Auditory vocabulary of the right hemisphere following brain bisection or hemidecortication. Cortex, 1976, 12, 191–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zaidel, E.Unilateral auditory language comprehension on the Token Test following cerebral commissurotomy and hemispherectomy. Neuropsychologia, 1977, 15, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zangwill, O.Speech and the minor hemisphere. Acta Neurologica Belgica, 1967, 67, 1013–20.Google ScholarPubMed