Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 7
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Balaban, Noga Friedmann, Naama and Ziv, Margalit 2016. Theory of mind impairment after right-hemisphere damage. Aphasiology, p. 1.


    Balaban, Noga Friedmann, Naama and Ariel, Mira 2016. The effect of theory of mind impairment on language: Referring after right-hemisphere damage. Aphasiology, p. 1.


    Baldo, Juliana V. Kacinik, Natalie A. Moncrief, Amber Beghin, Francesca and Dronkers, Nina F. 2016. You may now kiss the bride: Interpretation of social situations by individuals with right or left hemisphere injury. Neuropsychologia, Vol. 80, p. 133.


    Togher, Leanne 2012. Cognition and Acquired Language Disorders.


    2011. Psychological Management of Stroke.


    Martín-Rodríguez, Juan Francisco and León-Carrión, José 2010. Theory of mind deficits in patients with acquired brain injury: A quantitative review. Neuropsychologia, Vol. 48, Issue. 5, p. 1181.


    Weed, Ethan 2008. Theory of mind impairment in right hemisphere damage: A review of the evidence. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, Vol. 10, Issue. 6, p. 414.


    ×

That Can't Be Right! What Causes Pragmatic Language Impairment Following Right Hemisphere Damage?

  • Ingerith Martin (a1) and Skye McDonald (a2)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1375/brim.7.3.202
  • Published online: 01 February 2012
Abstract
Abstract

Right hemisphere damage (RHD) following unilateral stroke is often associated with impairment of pragmatic language, specifically, the ability to comprehend inferences that arise from language used in context. Three kinds of cognitive deficits have been proposed to explain the pragmatic deficits in RHD individuals, impaired Theory of Mind (TOM), weak central coherence (CC), and impaired executive function (EF). This study aims to evaluate the explanatory ability of these theories in relation to the comprehension of nonliteral (ironic) jokes versus literal lies. Twenty-one RHD patients and 21 age-matched controls were assessed on tasks tapping TOM, CC processing and general inference ability (EF) and the comprehension of irony. Second-order TOM and EF were found to play a significant role. However, neither construct, either in isolation or combined, completely explained the poor performance of RHD patients on this task compared to control participants.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*Address for correspondence: Professor Skye McDonald, School of Psychology, University of NSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Brain Impairment
  • ISSN: 1443-9646
  • EISSN: 1839-5252
  • URL: /core/journals/brain-impairment
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×