Discuit – a tool for dividing items into equal sets

In psycho- and neurolinguistic research, items often need to be partitioned into a specified number of subsets that are as comparable as possible regarding multiple variables. This enables a reliable comparison between experimental conditions. With Discuit (De Kok, 2023), we created a tool that can do this task automatically, using clustering algorithms. The tool takes a spreadsheet as input and generates the required number of sets, matched on the provided data. These data can be categorical (e.g. ‘word class’) and/or continuous (e.g. ‘word frequency’). Finally, one variable can be marked as “primary”. The items will be split perfectly even with regard to this variable (e.g. ‘accuracy in pre- treatment assessment’).We have piloted the tool in a recent aphasia treatment study to split the diagnostic items into to-be- trained and not-to-be-trained items for each of the two participants. In this presentation or poster, I will explain the underlying mechanism of the tool, illustrate how it can be used for different purposes and discuss our pilot study as an example use case.De Kok, D. (2023). Discuit (Version 0.1.0) [Computer software]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.767185

Discuit – a tool for dividing items into equal sets

In psycho- and neurolinguistic research, items often need to be partitioned into a specified number of subsets that are as comparable as possible regarding multiple variables. This enables a reliable comparison between experimental conditions. With Discuit (De Kok, 2023), we created a tool that can do this task automatically, using clustering algorithms. The tool takes a spreadsheet as input and generates the required number of sets, matched on the provided data. These data can be categorical (e.g. ‘word class’) and/or continuous (e.g. ‘word frequency’). Finally, one variable can be marked as “primary”. The items will be split perfectly even with regard to this variable (e.g. ‘accuracy in pre- treatment assessment’).We have piloted the tool in a recent aphasia treatment study to split the diagnostic items into to-be- trained and not-to-be-trained items for each of the two participants. In this presentation or poster, I will explain the underlying mechanism of the tool, illustrate how it can be used for different purposes and discuss our pilot study as an example use case.De Kok, D. (2023). Discuit (Version 0.1.0) [Computer software]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.767185

Discuit – a tool for dividing items into equal sets

In psycho- and neurolinguistic research, items often need to be partitioned into a specified number of subsets that are as comparable as possible regarding multiple variables. This enables a reliable comparison between experimental conditions. With Discuit (De Kok, 2023), we created a tool that can do this task automatically, using clustering algorithms. The tool takes a spreadsheet as input and generates the required number of sets, matched on the provided data. These data can be categorical (e.g. ‘word class’) and/or continuous (e.g. ‘word frequency’). Finally, one variable can be marked as “primary”. The items will be split perfectly even with regard to this variable (e.g. ‘accuracy in pre- treatment assessment’).We have piloted the tool in a recent aphasia treatment study to split the diagnostic items into to-be- trained and not-to-be-trained items for each of the two participants. In this presentation or poster, I will explain the underlying mechanism of the tool, illustrate how it can be used for different purposes and discuss our pilot study as an example use case.De Kok, D. (2023). Discuit (Version 0.1.0) [Computer software]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.767185

The Importance of Verbs in Diagnosing Aphasia

In clinical practice, standardized tests are used to assess the presence of aphasia. Verbs often play a minor role in these tests. Their role in language, however, is essential and they are known to be more difficult to retrieve for people with aphasia (PWA). Therefore, milder forms of aphasia might be missed in the diagnostic process. In the current study, we investigate whether people with brain-damage, but no diagnosed aphasia (BDnoA) show specific problems in verb retrieval and if so, whether similar psycholinguistic variables drive the performance as is the case in aphasia, e.g., age of acquisition (AoA) and imageability (Bastiaanse, Wieling, & Wolthuis, 2016). 61 non-brain-damaged speakers (NBD), 48 PWA and 12 BDnoA performed an object naming (ON) and an action naming (AN) task. In ON, PWA were less accurate than NBD and BDnoA, with no difference between the latter two. For AN, PWA scored worse than NBD and tended to be less accurate than BDnoA. BDnoA scored worse than NBD. Further investigation of AN in the BDnoA group showed that ‘AoA’ and ‘imageability’ predicted the outcome, but not ‘frequency’ or ‘length’. While results confirmed that BDnoA did not perform worse than NBD in ON, their deficits in verb retrieval, albeit small, are clearly visible. Common diagnostic batteries might miss these mild language deficits as verbs are not included or only play a minor role in the assessment. The performance of the BD group was driven by age of acquisition and imageability, in line with findings of Bastiaanse, Wieling, and Wolthuis (2016) for PWA. The underlying deficit, therefore, seems comparable and BDnoA might present with a mild form of aphasia. With the current data we cannot exclude other, not language-specific causes for the verb retrieval deficit with certainty. Nonetheless, in order not to overlook mild cases, verb retrieval should play a more prominent role in the assessment process

Language impairments in people with autoimmune neurological diseases:A scoping review

INTRODUCTION: Autoimmune neurological diseases (ANDs) are a specific type of autoimmune disease that affect cells within the central and peripheral nervous system. ANDs trigger various physical/neuropsychiatric symptoms. However, language impairments in people with ANDs are not well characterized. Here we aimed to determine the kinds of language impairment that most commonly emerge in 10 ANDs, the characteristics of the patients (demographic, neurological damage), and the assessment methods used.METHODS: We followed the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). PubMed and Google Scholar were searched. We used a list of search terms containing 10 types of ANDs (e.g., multiple sclerosis, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis) in combination with the terms aphasia, dysphasia, fluency, language, listening, morphology, phonology, pragmatics, reading, semantics, speaking, syntax, writing. The reference lists and citations of the relevant papers were also investigated. The type of AND, patient characteristics, neurological damage and examination technique, language tests administered, and main findings were noted for each study meeting the inclusion criteria.RESULTS: We found 171 studies meeting our inclusion criteria. These comprised group studies and case studies. Language impairments differed largely among types of ANDs. Neurological findings were mentioned in most of the papers, but specific language tests were rarely used.CONCLUSIONS: Language symptoms in people with ANDs are commonly reported. These are often not full descriptions or only focus on specific time points in the course of the disease. Future research needs to assess specific language functions in people with ANDs and relate their language impairments to brain damage at different stages of disease evolution.</p