Automatic metaphor processing in developmental dyslexia

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Rita Cersosimo , Filippo Domaneschi , Hamad Al-Azary
{"title":"Automatic metaphor processing in developmental dyslexia","authors":"Rita Cersosimo ,&nbsp;Filippo Domaneschi ,&nbsp;Hamad Al-Azary","doi":"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2024.106448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Previous research found metaphor impairments with dyslexia; however, it is unclear if difficulties are due to initial activation of the metaphorical meaning or to subsequent discourse integration processes. The study examines the presence of early automatic processing of metaphors in adults with developmental dyslexia, considering the role of executive functions and metaphor familiarity.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Using a sentence recall task and a semantic judgment task from the Metaphor Interference Effect (MIE) paradigm, we evaluated two early stages of metaphor comprehension, namely the generation of the figurative meaning and the suppression of the literal meaning. High and low familiar metaphors, and their scrambled counterparts, were aurally presented to participants, who were asked to judge whether sentences were literally true or literally false. Afterwards, they were provided ten minutes to recall the sentences they heard to verify the depth of processing for each type of stimulus. A total of 26 participants with dyslexia were included in the experimental group, and 31 in the control group.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Individuals with dyslexia showed a MIE and an accuracy rate that are similar to participants without dyslexia. Inhibition correlated with the MIE size only for high familiar metaphors, and working memory seemed to play no role in the process. In the recall task, both groups demonstrated a better encoding of the metaphorical sentences compared to scrambled metaphors, but participants with dyslexia recalled less metaphors than did the control group, showing that metaphors are no exception to the limitations in sentence retrieval typically found in dyslexia.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Our findings suggest that individuals with dyslexia are comparable to participants without dyslexia in their ability to automatically compute metaphorical meanings. Thus, difficulties in metaphor comprehension in people with dyslexia that have been detected in previous studies might depend on meaning construction in context rather than online semantic processing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49175,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication Disorders","volume":"111 ","pages":"Article 106448"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992424000443","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Previous research found metaphor impairments with dyslexia; however, it is unclear if difficulties are due to initial activation of the metaphorical meaning or to subsequent discourse integration processes. The study examines the presence of early automatic processing of metaphors in adults with developmental dyslexia, considering the role of executive functions and metaphor familiarity.

Methods

Using a sentence recall task and a semantic judgment task from the Metaphor Interference Effect (MIE) paradigm, we evaluated two early stages of metaphor comprehension, namely the generation of the figurative meaning and the suppression of the literal meaning. High and low familiar metaphors, and their scrambled counterparts, were aurally presented to participants, who were asked to judge whether sentences were literally true or literally false. Afterwards, they were provided ten minutes to recall the sentences they heard to verify the depth of processing for each type of stimulus. A total of 26 participants with dyslexia were included in the experimental group, and 31 in the control group.

Results

Individuals with dyslexia showed a MIE and an accuracy rate that are similar to participants without dyslexia. Inhibition correlated with the MIE size only for high familiar metaphors, and working memory seemed to play no role in the process. In the recall task, both groups demonstrated a better encoding of the metaphorical sentences compared to scrambled metaphors, but participants with dyslexia recalled less metaphors than did the control group, showing that metaphors are no exception to the limitations in sentence retrieval typically found in dyslexia.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that individuals with dyslexia are comparable to participants without dyslexia in their ability to automatically compute metaphorical meanings. Thus, difficulties in metaphor comprehension in people with dyslexia that have been detected in previous studies might depend on meaning construction in context rather than online semantic processing.

发育性阅读障碍中的自动隐喻处理。
导言:以前的研究发现,隐喻障碍与阅读障碍有关;然而,目前还不清楚困难是由于隐喻意义的最初激活还是由于随后的话语整合过程造成的。本研究考虑了执行功能和隐喻熟悉程度的作用,探讨了发育性阅读障碍成人是否存在隐喻的早期自动加工:方法:我们使用隐喻干扰效应(MIE)范式中的句子回忆任务和语义判断任务,评估了隐喻理解的两个早期阶段,即形象意义的生成和字面意义的抑制。我们用声音向受试者呈现了高熟悉度隐喻和低熟悉度隐喻,以及它们的混淆对应物,要求受试者判断句子字面上的真假。之后,他们有十分钟的时间来回忆听到的句子,以验证对每种刺激的处理深度。实验组共有 26 名阅读障碍患者,对照组有 31 名:结果:有阅读障碍者的 MIE 和准确率与无阅读障碍者相似。抑制与 MIE 大小相关的只有高度熟悉的隐喻,而工作记忆似乎在这一过程中没有发挥作用。在回忆任务中,与乱码隐喻相比,两组受试者对隐喻句子的编码效果都更好,但阅读障碍受试者回忆起的隐喻少于对照组受试者,这表明隐喻也不例外,阅读障碍患者在句子检索方面通常会受到限制:我们的研究结果表明,阅读障碍患者在自动计算隐喻含义方面的能力与无阅读障碍患者相当。因此,以往研究中发现的阅读障碍患者在隐喻理解方面的困难可能取决于语境中的意义建构,而不是在线语义处理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Communication Disorders
Journal of Communication Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
71
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Communication Disorders publishes original articles on topics related to disorders of speech, language and hearing. Authors are encouraged to submit reports of experimental or descriptive investigations (research articles), review articles, tutorials or discussion papers, or letters to the editor ("short communications"). Please note that we do not accept case studies unless they conform to the principles of single-subject experimental design. Special issues are published periodically on timely and clinically relevant topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信