Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-6c8bd87754-sbrr8 Total loading time: 0.512 Render date: 2022-01-19T04:03:18.474Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Aprosodia Subsequent to Right Hemisphere Brain Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2021

Melissa D. Stockbridge*
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
Shannon-M. Sheppard
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Chapman University, Irvine, CA, USA
Lynsey M. Keator
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA
Laura L. Murray
Affiliation:
School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
Margaret Lehman Blake
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
*
*Correspondence and reprint requests to: Melissa D. Stockbridge, Department of Neurology, 600 North Wolfe Street, Phipps 4, Suite 446, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. E-mail: md.stockbridge@jhmi.edu

Abstract

Objective:

To identify which aspects of prosody are negatively affected subsequent to right hemisphere brain damage (RHD) and to evaluate the methodological quality of the constituent studies.

Method:

Twenty-one electronic databases were searched to identify articles from 1970 to February 2020 by entering keywords. Eligibility criteria for articles included a focus on adults with acquired RHD, prosody as the primary research topic, and publication in a peer-reviewed journal. A quality appraisal was conducted using a rubric adapted from Downs and Black (1998).

Results:

Of the 113 articles appraised as eligible and appropriate for inclusion, 71 articles were selected to undergo data extraction for both meta-analyses of population effect size estimates and qualitative synthesis. Across all domains of prosody, the effect estimate was g = 2.51 [95% CI (1.94, 3.09), t = 8.66, p < 0.0001], based on 129 contrasts between RHD and non-brain-damaged healthy controls (NBD), indicating a significant random effects model. This effect size was driven by findings in emotional prosody, g = 2.48 [95% CI (1.76, 3.20), t = 6.88, p < 0.0001]. Overall, studies of higher quality (r pb = 0.18, p < 0.001) and higher sample size/contrast ratio (r pb = 0.25, p < 0.001) were more likely to report significant differences between RHD and NBD participants.

Conclusions:

The results confirm consistent evidence for emotional prosody deficits in the RHD population. Inconsistent evidence was observed across linguistic prosody domains and pervasive methodological issues were identified across studies, regardless of their prosody focus. These findings highlight the need for more rigorous and sufficiently high-powered designs to examine prosody subsequent to RHD, particularly within the linguistic prosody domain.

Type
Critical Review
Copyright
Copyright © INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Group members: Hiram Brownell, Psychology, Boston College; Joseph Duffy, Speech Pathology/Neurology, Mayo Clinic; Perrine Ferré, University Geriatrics Institute of Montréal; Argye Hillis-Trupe, Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Jerry K. Hoepner, Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Wisconsin Eau Claire; Yves Joanette, University Geriatrics Institute of Montréal & University of Montréal; Kristine Lundgren, Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of North Carolina Greensboro; Jamila Minga, Communication Sciences and Disorders, North Carolina Central University; Connie Tompkins, Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh.

References

Aasland, W. A., & Baum, S. R. (2003). Temporal parameters as cues to phrasal boundaries: A comparison of processing by left-and right-hemisphere brain-damaged individuals. Brain and Language, 87(3), 385399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abramovitch, A., Anholt, G., Raveh-Gottfried, S., Hamo, N., & Abramowitz, J. S. (2018). Meta-analysis of intelligence quotient (IQ) in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Neuropsychology Review, 28(1), 111120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balan, A., & Gandour, J. (1999). Effect of sentence length on the production of linguistic stress by left-and right-hemisphere-damaged patients. Brain and Language, 67(2), 7394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baldo, J. V., Kacinik, N. A., Moncrief, A., Beghin, F., & Dronkers, N. F. (2016). You may now kiss the bride: Interpretation of social situations by individuals with right or left hemisphere injury. Neuropsychologia, 80, 133141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnes, S., Beeke, S., & Bloch, S. (2020). How is right hemisphere communication disorder disabling? Evidence from response mobilizing actions in conversation. Disability and Rehabilitation, 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, S. R. (1998). The role of fundamental frequency and duration in the perception of linguistic stress by individuals with brain damage. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41(1), 3140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baum, S. R., & Boyczuk, J. P. (1999). Speech timing subsequent to brain damage: Effects of utterance length and complexity. Brain and Language, 67(1), 3045.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baum, S. R., & Dwivedi, V. D. (2003). Sensitivity to prosodic structure in left-and right-hemisphere-damaged individuals. Brain and Language, 87(2), 278289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baum, S. R., & Pell, M. D. (1997). Production of affective and linguistic prosody by brain-damaged patients. Aphasiology, 11(2), 177198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, S. R., Pell, M. D., Leonard, C. L., & Gordon, J. K. (1997). The ability of right-and left-hemisphere-damaged individuals to produce and interpret prosodic cues marking phrasal boundaries. Language and Speech, 40(4), 313330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baum, S. R., Pell, M. D., Leonard, C. L., & Gordon, J. K. (2001). Using prosody to resolve temporary syntactic ambiguities in speech production: acoustic data on brain-damaged speakers. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 15(6), 441456.Google Scholar
Behrens, S. J. (1988). The role of the right hemisphere in the production of linguistic stress. Brain and Language, 33(1), 104127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bélanger, N., Baum, S. R., & Titone, D. (2009). Use of prosodic cues in the production of idiomatic and literal sentences by individuals with right-and left-hemisphere damage. Brain and Language, 110(1), 3842.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belleville, S., Fouquet, C., Hudon, C., Zomahoun, H. T. V., & Croteau, J. (2017). Neuropsychological measures that predict progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s type dementia in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychology Review, 27(4), 328353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blake, M. L. (2018). The right hemisphere and disorders of cognition and communication: Theory and clinical practice: Plural Publishing, Incorporated.Google Scholar
Blake, M. L., Duffy, J. R., Myers, P. S., & Tompkins, C. A. (2002). Prevalence and patterns of right hemisphere cognitive/communicative deficits: Retrospective data from an inpatient rehabilitation unit. Aphasiology, 16(4–6), 537547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blonder, L. X., Bowers, D., & Heilman, K. M. (1991). The role of the right hemisphere in emotional communication. Brain, 114(3), 11151127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blonder, L. X., Pettigrew, L. C., & Kryscio, R. J. (2012). Emotion recognition and marital satisfaction in stroke. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 34(6), 634642.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blonder, L. X., & Ranseen, J. D. (1994). Awareness of deficit following right hemisphere stroke. Neuropsychiatry, Neuropsychology, and Behavioral Neurology.Google Scholar
Borod, J. C., Cicero, B. A., Obler, L. K., Welkowitz, J., Erhan, H. M., Santschi, C., … Whalen, J. R. (1998). Right hemisphere emotional perception: evidence across multiple channels. Neuropsychology, 12(3), 446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brådvik, B., Dravins, C., Holtås, S., Rosen, I., Ryding, E., & Ingvar, D. (1991). Disturbances of speech prosody following right hemisphere infarcts. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 84(2), 114126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charbonneau, S., Scherzer, B., Aspirot, D., & Cohen, H. (2003). Perception and production of facial and prosodic emotions by chronic CVA patients. Neuropsychologia, 41(5), 605613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheung, M. W.-L. (2019). A guide to conducting a meta-analysis with non-independent effect sizes. Neuropsychology Review, 110.Google ScholarPubMed
Cumming, G. (2013). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durfee, A. Z., Sheppard, S., Blake, M. L., & Hillis, A. E. (submitted). Lesions associated with impaired affective prosody: A systematic review of evidence from stroke. Brain and Cognition. Google Scholar
Edmondson, J. A., Chan, J.-L., Seibert, G. B., & Ross, E. D. (1987). The effect of right-brain damage on acoustical measures of affective prosody in Taiwanese patients. Journal of Phonetics. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, K. D. (1987). The neurological substrates for prosodic aspects of speech. Brain and Language, 30(2), 305320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferré, P., & Joanette, Y. (2016). Communication abilities following right hemisphere damage: Prevalence, evaluation, and profiles. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 1(2), 106115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonseca, R. P., Fachel, J. M. G., Chaves, M. L. F., Liedtke, F. V., & Parente, M. A. d. M. P. (2007). Right hemisphere damage: Communication processing in adults evaluated by the Brazilian Protocole MEC–Bateria MAC. Dementia & Neuropsychologia, 1(3), 266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gandour, J., & Baum, S. R. (2001). Production of stress retraction by left-and right-hemisphere-damaged patients. Brain and Language, 79(3), 482494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gandour, J., Larsen, J., Dechongkit, S., Ponglorpisit, S., & Khunadorn, F. (1995). Speech prosody in affective contexts in Thai patients with right hemisphere lesions. Brain and Language, 51(3), 422443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gandour, J., Ponglorpisit, S., Khunadorn, F., Dechongkit, S., Boongird, P., & Satthamnuwong, N. (2000). Speech timing in Thai left-and right-hemisphere-damaged individuals. Cortex, 36(2), 281288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geigenberger, A., & Ziegler, W. (2001). Receptive prosodic processing in aphasia. Aphasiology, 15(12), 11691187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1996). Using prosody to predict the end of sentences in English and French: Normal and brain-damaged subjects. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11(1–2), 107134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guranski, K., & Podemski, R. (2015). Emotional prosody expression in acoustic analysis in patients with right hemisphere ischemic stroke. Neurologia i Neurochirurgia Polska, 49(2), 113120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harciarek, M., Heilman, K. M., & Jodzio, K. (2006). Defective comprehension of emotional faces and prosody as a result of right hemisphere stroke: Modality versus emotion-type specificity. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society: JINS, 12(6), 774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (2014). Statistical methods for meta-analysis: Academic press.Google Scholar
Heilman, K. M., Bowers, D., Speedie, L., & Coslett, H. B. (1984). Comprehension of affective and nonaffective prosody. Neurology, 34(7), 917917.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heilman, K. M., Bowers, D., Valenstein, E., & Watson, R. T. (1986). The right hemisphere: neuropsychological functions. Journal of Neurosurgery, 64(5), 693704.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hewetson, R., Cornwell, P., & Shum, D. (2018). Social participation following right hemisphere stroke: influence of a cognitive-communication disorder. Aphasiology, 32(2), 164182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillis Trupe, E., & Hillis, A. (1985). Paucity vs. verbosity: Another analysis of right hemisphere communication deficits. Clinical Aphasiology, 15, 8396.Google Scholar
Hughes, C. P., Chan, J. L., & Su, M. S. (1983). Aprosodia in Chinese patients with right cerebral hemisphere lesions. Archives of Neurology, 40(12), 732736.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karow, C. M., Marquardt, T. P., & Levitt, S. (2013). Processing of ambiguous emotional messages in brain injured patients with and without subcortical lesions. Aphasiology, 27(3), 344363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karow, C. M., Marquardt, T. P., & Marshall, R. C. (2001). Affective processing in left and right hemisphere brain-damaged subjects with and without subcortical involvement. Aphasiology, 15(8), 715729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kucharska-Pietura, K., Phillips, M. L., Gernand, W., & David, A. S. (2003). Perception of emotions from faces and voices following unilateral brain damage. Neuropsychologia, 41(8), 10821090.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lalande, S., Braun, C., Charlebois, N., & Whitaker, H. A. (1992). Effects of right and left hemisphere cerebrovascular lesions on discrimination of prosodic and semantic aspects of affect in sentences. Brain and Language, 42(2), 165186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehiste, I. (1970). Suprasegmentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Leiva, S., Difalcis, M., López, C., Margulis, L., Micciulli, A., Abusamra, V., & Ferreres, A. (2017). Dissociations between emotional and linguistic prosody in patients with right hemisphere lesions. LIBERABIT-REVISTA DE PSICOLOGIA, 23(2), 213234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., … Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), e1e34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
López-López, J. A., Van den Noortgate, W., Tanner-Smith, E. E., Wilson, S. J., & Lipsey, M. W. (2017). Assessing meta-regression methods for examining moderator relationships with dependent effect sizes: AM onte C arlo simulation. Research synthesis methods, 8(4), 435450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüdecke, D. (2018). Effect Size Computation for Meta Analysis. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=esc.Google Scholar
Myers, P. S., & Linebaugh, C. W. (1981). Comprehension of idiomatic expressions by right-hemisphere-damaged adults. Paper presented at the Clinical Aphasiology: Proceedings of the Conference 1981.Google Scholar
Nakhutina, L., Borod, J. C., & Zgaljardic, D. J. (2006). Posed prosodic emotional expression in unilateral stroke patients: Recovery, lesion location, and emotional perception. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21(1), 113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Orbelo, D. M., Testa, J. A., & Ross, E. D. (2003). Age-related impairments in comprehending affective prosody with comparison to brain-damaged subjects. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 16(1), 4452.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ouellette, G. P., & Baum, S. R. (1994). Acoustic analysis of prosodic cues in left-and right-hemisphere-damaged patients. Aphasiology, 8(3), 257283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papagno, C., Curti, R., Rizzo, S., Crippa, F., & Colombo, M. R. (2006). Is the right hemisphere involved in idiom comprehension? A neuropsychological study. Neuropsychology, 20(5), 598.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parola, A., Gabbatore, I., Bosco, F. M., Bara, B. G., Cossa, F. M., Gindri, P., & Sacco, K. (2016). Assessment of pragmatic impairment in right hemisphere damage. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 39, 1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pell, M. D. (1998). Recognition of prosody following unilateral brain lesion: influence of functional and structural attributes of prosodic contours. Neuropsychologia, 36(8), 701715.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pell, M. D. (1999a). Fundamental frequency encoding of linguistic and emotional prosody by right hemisphere-damaged speakers. Brain and Language, 69(2), 161192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pell, M. D. (1999b). The temporal organization of affective and non-affective speech in patients with right-hemisphere infarcts. Cortex, 35(4), 455477.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pell, M. D. (2006). Cerebral mechanisms for understanding emotional prosody in speech. Brain and Language, 96(2), 221234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pell, M. D. (2007). Reduced sensitivity to prosodic attitudes in adults with focal right hemisphere brain damage. Brain and Language, 101(1), 6479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pell, M. D., & Baum, S. R. (1997a). The ability to perceive and comprehend intonation in linguistic and affective contexts by brain-damaged adults. Brain and Language, 57(1), 8099.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pell, M. D., & Baum, S. R. (1997b). Unilateral brain damage, prosodic comprehension deficits, and the acoustic cues to prosody. Brain and Language, 57(2), 195214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peper, M., & Irle, E. (1997). Categorical and dimensional decoding of emotional intonations in patients with focal brain lesions. Brain and Language, 58(2), 233264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peppé, S. J. (2009). Why is prosody in speech-language pathology so difficult? International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11(4), 258271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raudenbush, S. W., Becker, B. J., & Kalaian, H. (1988). Modeling multivariate effect sizes. Psychological Bulletin, 103(1), 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbek, J. C., Crucian, G. P., Leon, S. A., Hieber, B., Rodriguez, A. D., Holiway, B., … Gonzalez-rothi, L. (2004). Novel treatments for expressive aprosodia: A phase I investigation of cognitive linguistic and imitative interventions. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society: JINS, 10(5), 786.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenbek, J. C., Rodriguez, A. D., Hieber, B., & Leon, S. A. (2006). Effects of two treatments for aprosodia secondary to acquired brain injury. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 43(3), 379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenthal, R., Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. The handbook of research synthesis, 621(2), 231244.Google Scholar
Ross, E. D. (1981). The aprosodias: Functional-anatomic organization of the affective components of language in the right hemisphere. Archives of Neurology, 38(9), 561569.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, E. D. (1997). Right hemisphere syndromes and the neurology of emotion. Behavioral neurology and the legacy of Norman Geschwind, 183191.Google Scholar
Ross, E. D. (2000). Affective prosody and the aprosodias. Principles of behavioral and cognitive neurology, 2, 316326.Google Scholar
Ross, E. D., & Monnot, M. (2008). Neurology of affective prosody and its functional–anatomic organization in right hemisphere. Brain and Language, 104(1), 5174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, E. D., & Monnot, M. (2011). Affective prosody: what do comprehension errors tell us about hemispheric lateralization of emotions, sex and aging effects, and the role of cognitive appraisal. Neuropsychologia, 49(5), 866877.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, E. D., Orbelo, D., Cartwright, J., Hansel, S., Burgard, M., Testa, J., & Buck, R. (2001). Affective-prosodic deficits in schizophrenia: profiles of patients with brain damage and comparison with relation to schizophrenic symptoms. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 70(5), 597604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, E. D., Shayya, L., & Rousseau, J. F. (2013). Prosodic stress: Acoustic, aphasic, aprosodic and neuroanatomic interactions. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 26(5), 526551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, E. D., Thompson, R. D., & Yenkosky, J. (1997). Lateralization of affective prosody in brain and the callosal integration of hemispheric language functions. Brain and Language, 56(1), 2754.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryalls, J., Joanette, Y., & Feldman, L. (1987). An acoustic comparison of normal and right-hemisphere-damaged speech prosody. Cortex, 23(4), 685694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rymarczyk, K., & Grabowska, A. (2007). Sex differences in brain control of prosody. Neuropsychologia, 45(5), 921930.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schirmer, A., Alter, K., Kotz, S. A., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Lateralization of prosody during language production: A lesion study. Brain and Language, 76(1), 117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlanger, S. O., & Jenkyns, H. (1976). Cretaceous oceanic anoxic events: causes and consequences. Geologie en mijnbouw, 55(3–4).Google Scholar
Schmitt, J. J., Hartje, W., & Willmes, K. (1997). Hemispheric asymmetry in the recognition of emotional attitude conveyed by facial expression, prosody and propositional speech. Cortex, 33(1), 6581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, A. P., & Baum, S. R. (2006). Perception of lexical stress by brain-damaged individuals: Effects on lexical–semantic activation. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(2), 143156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, A. P., Baum, S. R., & Dwivedi, V. D. (2006). Neural substrates of linguistic prosody: Evidence from syntactic disambiguation in the productions of brain-damaged patients. Brain and Language, 96(1), 7889.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shapiro, B. E., & Danly, M. (1985). The role of the right hemisphere in the control of speech prosody in propositional and affective contexts. Brain and Language, 25(1), 1936.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheppard, S. M., Keator, L. M., Breining, B. L., Wright, A. E., Saxena, S., Tippett, D. C., & Hillis, A. E. (2020). Right hemisphere ventral stream for emotional prosody identification: Evidence from acute stroke. Neurology, 94(10), e1013e1020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sidtis, D. V. L., & Yang, S.-y. (2017). Formulaic language performance in left-and right-hemisphere damaged patients: structured testing. Aphasiology, 31(1), 8299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tompkins, C. A. (1991a). Automatic and effortful processing of emotional intonation after right or left hemisphere brain damage. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 34(4), 820830.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tompkins, C. A. (1991b). Redundancy enhances emotional inferencing by right-and left-hemisphere-damaged adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 34(5), 11421149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tompkins, C. A., & Flowers, C. R. (1985). Perception of emotional intonation by brain-damaged adults: The influence of task processing levels. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 28(4), 527538.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tompkins, C. A., & Flowers, C. R. (1987). Contextual mood priming following left and right hemisphere damage. Brain and Cognition, 6(4), 361376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tompkins, C. A., Klepousniotou, E., & Gibbs Scott, A. (2012). Nature and assessment of right hemisphere disorders. Aphasia and related neurogenic communication disorders, 297332.Google Scholar
Twist, D. J., Squires, N. K., & Spielholz, N. I. (1991). Linguistic Processing. Neuropsychiatry, Neuropsychology, and Behavioral Neurology, 4(4), 281304.Google Scholar
Van Lancker, D., & Sidtis, J. J. (1992). The identification of affective-prosodic stimuli by left-and right-hemisphere-damaged subjects: all errors are not created equal. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 35(5), 963970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Lancker Sidtis, D., & Postman, W. A. (2006). Formulaic expressions in spontaneous speech of left-and right-hemisphere-damaged subjects. Aphasiology, 20(5), 411426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, J. P., Daigle, T., & Buzzard, M. (2002). Hemispheric specialisation in processing prosodic structures: Revisited. Aphasiology, 16(12), 11551172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, J. P., Fongemie, K., & Daigle, T. (2001). Prosodic facilitation in the resolution of syntactic ambiguities in subjects with left and right hemisphere damage. Brain and Language, 78(2), 169196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, J. P., Pelletier, R., & Reif, L. (2004). The production of linguistic prosodic structures in subjects with right hemisphere damage. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 18(2), 85106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weed, E., & Fusaroli, R. (2020). Acoustic Measures of Prosody in Right-Hemisphere Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 114.Google ScholarPubMed
Weintraub, S., Mesulam, M.-M., & Kramer, L. (1981). Disturbances in prosody: A right-hemisphere contribution to language. Archives of Neurology, 38(12), 742744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weissberger, G. H., Strong, J. V., Stefanidis, K. B., Summers, M. J., Bondi, M. W., & Stricker, N. H. (2017). Diagnostic accuracy of memory measures in Alzheimer’s dementia and mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychology Review, 27(4), 354388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wells, J. C. (2006). English Intonation. Cambridge, United Kingdom Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wertz, R. T., Henschel, C. R., Auther, L. L., Ashford, J. R., & Kirshner, H. S. (1998). Affective prosodic disturbance subsequent to right hemisphere stroke: A clinical application. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 11(1–2), 89102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, A., Saxena, S., Sheppard, S. M., & Hillis, A. E. (2018). Selective impairments in components of affective prosody in neurologically impaired individuals. Brain and Cognition, 124, 2936.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wunderlich, A., Ziegler, W., & Geigenberger, A. (2003). Implicit processing of prosodic information in patients with left and right hemisphere stroke. Aphasiology, 17(9), 861879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, S.-y., Sidtis, D., & Yang, S. N. (2017). Listeners’ identification and evaluation of Korean idiomatic utterances produced by persons with left-or right-hemisphere damage. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 31(2), 155173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zgaljardic, D. J., Borod, J. C., & Sliwinski, M. (2002). Emotional perception in unilateral stroke patients: Recovery, test stability, and interchannel relationships. Applied Neuropsychology, 9(3), 159172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Stockbridge et al. supplementary material

Stockbridge et al. supplementary material

Download Stockbridge et al. supplementary material(File)
File 21 KB
1
Cited by

Linked content

Please note a has been issued for this article.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Aprosodia Subsequent to Right Hemisphere Brain Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Aprosodia Subsequent to Right Hemisphere Brain Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Aprosodia Subsequent to Right Hemisphere Brain Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *