Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jun;30(6):809-826.
doi: 10.1037/pas0000529. Epub 2018 Mar 19.

A cognitive psychometric model for assessment of picture naming abilities in aphasia

Affiliations

A cognitive psychometric model for assessment of picture naming abilities in aphasia

Grant M Walker et al. Psychol Assess. 2018 Jun.

Abstract

Picture naming impairments are a typical feature of stroke-induced aphasia. Overall accuracy and rates of different error types are used to make inferences about the severity and nature of damage to the brain's language network. Currently available assessment tools for picture naming accuracy treat it as a unidimensional measure, while assessment tools for error types treat items homogenously, contrary to findings from psycholinguistic investigations of word production. We created and tested a new cognitive psychometric model for assessment of picture naming responses, using cognitive theory to specify latent processing decisions during the production of a naming attempt, and using item response theory to separate the effects of item difficulty and participant ability on these internal processing decisions. The model enables multidimensional assessment of latent picture naming abilities on a common scale, with a relatively large cohort for normative reference. We present the results of 4 experiments testing our interpretation of the model's parameters, as they apply to picture naming predictions, lexical properties of the items, statistical properties of the lexicon, and participants' scores on other tests. We also created a website for researchers and clinicians to analyze item-level data using our model, providing estimates of latent abilities and percentile scores, as well as credible intervals to help gauge the reliability of the estimated model parameters and identify meaningful changes. To the extent that the model is successful, the estimated parameter values may aid in treatment decisions and progress monitoring, or they may help elucidate the functional properties of brain networks. (PsycINFO Database Record

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The MPT model architecture. Nodes with rounded corners represent latent processing decisions, and leaf nodes with square corners represent response types. C = Correct, S = Semantic, F = Formal, M = Mixed, U = Unrelated, N = Neologism, AN = Abstruse Neologism, NA = Non-naming Attempt. Each branch is associated with a probability indicated by the letters a–h.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Frequency distributions of posterior means for the MPT model’s ability and difficulty parameters. Although Sem is a probability, it was converted to a logit scale for consistency with the other parameters.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Frequency distributions of posterior 95% credible interval (CI) widths for the MPT model’s ability and difficulty parameters. Although Sem is a probability, it was converted to a logit scale for consistency with the other parameters.

References

    1. Batchelder WH. Multinomial processing tree models and psychological assessment. Psychological Assessment. 1998;10(4):331. - PubMed
    1. Batchelder WH. Cognitive psychometrics: Using multinomial processing tree models as measurement tools. In: Embretson Susan., editor. Measuring psychological constructs: Advances in model-based approaches. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2010. pp. 71–93.
    1. Batchelder WH, Riefer DM. Theoretical and empirical review of multinomial process tree modeling. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 1999;6(1):57–86. - PubMed
    1. Best W. When racquets are baskets but baskets are biscuits, where do the words come from? A single case study of formal paraphasic errors in aphasia. Cognitive Neuropsychology. 1996;13(3):443–480.
    1. Bormann T, Kulke F, Wallesch CW, Blanken G. Omissions and semantic errors in aphasic naming: Is there a link? Brain and Language. 2008;104(1):24–32. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms