The impact of phonological short-term memory impairment on verbal repetition in the logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA) is characterized mainly by anomia, production of phonological errors, and impairment in repetition of sentences. The functional origin of these language impairments is mainly attributed to the breakdown of phonological short-term memory. The present study examined the effects of phonological short-term memory impairment on language processing in lvPPA. In two studies, 11 participants with lvPPA and 11 healthy control participants were presented with repetition tasks in which the type and length of stimuli and the mode of administration were manipulated. Study 1 aimed to examine the influence of length and lexicality (words vs. pseudowords) on immediate and delayed repetition, whereas Study 2 aimed to examine the influence of length, syntactic complexity (nominalized vs. pronominalized sentences), and serial position on immediate sentence repetition. Study 1 showed that participants' performance with lvPPA was impaired only on immediate repetition of five-syllable pseudowords and on delayed repetition of words and pseudowords. Study 2 showed that participants' performance with lvPPA was impaired in the repetition of nominalized sentences where a recency effect was observed. Repetition of pronominalized sentences was also impaired in the lvPPA group. This study provides additional support for arguments regarding phonological short-term memory as a cause of language impairment in lvPPA. Clinically, the results of the study suggest that instruments for assessing repetition ability in lvPPA should include not only lists of short or long nominalized sentences, but also delayed repetition of words and pseudowords and pronominalized sentences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".