Language Processing Deficiency - Coursework Example

? LANGUAGE PROCESSING WORK and number: submitted: LANGUAGE PROCESSING WORK Conclusions from the Data With his performance in word-to-picture matching, and word and non-word discrimination, it can be concluded that KW does not suffer from word form deafness. This is because as explained by Franklin (1989), there ought to be a total impairment to the access to auditory input lexicon in patients who exhibit a combined impairment in auditory lexicon decision and spoken comprehension for word form deafness to be suspected. Meanwhile, KW did not exhibit any relation in his auditory and visual lexical decisions as he scores very high marks of 29/30 in the sound to picture matching task but, which is a component of visual lexical decision, but relatively lower marks in the word and non-word discrimination, which is also a component part of auditory lexical decision. This conclusion does not however totally justify the absence of a possible language processing deficiency. Pursuant to the fact that in the test for lexicon decisions, scores for visual presentation were far higher than scores for auditory presentation, it can be also be concluded that KW’s major weakness results from an ability to hold on to abstractive ideas. That is, in the processing of language, KW is not able to make a retentive transfer of knowledge from an abstract source to a reproductive source (Norris, 1994). Due to the weaknesses in the degree of retention, KW always prefers to have a more visible source of language processing source like visuals and other images, which would by themselves hold memory for reproduction and interpretation. There is further justification to the conclusion that KW suffers from an ability to hold on to abstractive idea in the scores synonym judgment. Between written presentation and spoken presentation, it would be noticed that written presentation often demand people to readily process language by drawing reproducing interpretations from what is readily available to them in text. This therefore eliminates abstraction to a very large extent. In this context therefore, the scores were 60/60 and 55/60, which are fairly good. But with reference to spoken presentation in synonym judgment, there are no visual sources from which references can be made in drawing judgments. To this end, KW scored lower marks of 33/60 and 36/60. Due to the influence that written presentation has on semantics, it can be said that KW does not have a clinical problem with his semantic system (Patterson and Shewell, 1987). However, there is a lackadaisical ability on his auditory system. In sum, KW suffers impaired dissociation when it comes to spoken and other abstract items. Again, it can be concluded that the phonological output of KW is very question and suspect, with even worse indications of orthographic conversions. This is as a result of his scores in defining and spelling spoken words. Generally, there were high scores with the repetition of words that were spoken to him. This shows a partial mastery of phonological output, but only partial because he could not go on to further make use of this in the definition of words, as marks dropped from 158/160 to 73/320. On the writing to dictation, which borders on orthographic conversions, there is evidence that KW has a problem with conversion from phonological output to orthography because there was a declined score of 140/320, which could not even be said to be a medial score. Therapy for KW In identifying or prescribing a therapy for KW, it is important to understand and appreciate the fact that in the attempt to treat cases of word-meaning deafness or any form of auditory process disorder, it is important to approach it from an individualized and deficit-specific perspective (Paivio, Yuille and Madigan, 1968). What this means is that there cannot be an all-right and all-wrong approach to helping KW overcome his situation. Rather a series of diagnostic studies and search ought to be considered to ensure that whatever therapy is being recommended or implemented is one that meets the specific health and physical needs of KW. In terms of diagnosis, the data presented can be used as a major point or tool for decision making, leading up to the understanding that KW suffers an auditory comprehension disturbance. This is because as far as visual comprehension is concerned, there have been high scoring marks in areas like picture-to-word recognition and written recognition to show that there is high level of master in that area. The therapy being recommended is there one that directly addresses auditory comprehension disturbance, which is compensatory strategies, otherwise known as student modification strategy. In compensatory strategies, the focus is on the student, rather than other possible factors and stakeholders for change, such as teacher, parent or the environment (Richard, 2001). The focus for KW will therefore be in the strengthening of his central resources with particular emphasis on language, memory and cognitive skills. These three areas are selected due to the diagnosis made with the data and the aim of specifically correcting auditory comprehension disturbance that emanates from inability to uphold abstract source of knowledge. By so doing, and with the compensatory strategies or therapy, KW will be empowered to take responsibility for the success of his listening abilities. It must be emphasized here that, an important rationale for making KW responsible for his listening success is that he is a mature person who has exhibited sufficient control and mastery over other areas and aspects of his language processing skills. This strategy will therefore be highly effective as it is participant based and would allow for sufficient activity from the KW. As part of the therapy, it is expected that there will be a number of active listening techniques that address core weaknesses of KW. As part of techniques for the therapy, it is expected that there will be identification of body language and facial expressions as a way of learning to associate word form through lip reading. The relevance of this relation is that when patients cannot rightly make meanings from the body and face, they are much likely not to be successful with lip reading (Anderson, 1989). Meanwhile for KW, lip reading activity would help as a way of visualizing words that are spoken. The use of practice rephrasing is also going to be very common in the therapy. This is because practice rephrasing will ensure that there is adequate time in the processing of what people say. This way, enough practicing and exercising on abstract sources of knowledge can be guaranteed in the course of any conversation. More and more often also, KW will be made to speak up for himself instead of being spoken for. This is expected to enhance self practice instead of relying on repetition from what other people have already said. Finally, vision related interventions such as the use of texting, written reminders, e-mails and visualization techniques will be used to compensate for auditory memory disfunctions. Cited Works Anderson, K. (1989). Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk (S.I.F.T.E.R.). Tampa, FLA: The Educational Audiology Association. Hall D A and Riddoch M J (1997) Word meaning deafness: spelling words that are not understood. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14, 1131 – 1164 Norris,D. (1994). Shortlist: Aconnectionistmodelofcontinuous speechrecognition. Cognition, 52, 189–234. Paivio, A., Yuille, J.D., & Madigan, S.A. (1968). Concreteness, imagery and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Monograph Supplement, 76 (1, part 2), 1–25. Patterson, K.E., &Shewell, C. (1987). Speak and spell: Dissociations andword-class effects. In M. Coltheart, R. Job, & G. Sartori (Eds.), The cognitive neuropsychology of language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Richard, G.J. (2001). The Source for Processing Disorders. East Moline, IL: Linguisystems, inc. Read More