What Is Modified Semantic-Based Treatments?

Objects play a central role in the life of humans. Through objects we have created an elaborate society that separates us from other animals. Humans are born with a need for tools. We were born without them, yet we came to rely and develop them. We have created the need for objects, such as tools. Creating and changing objects helps determine how we interact with others. Objects are a way that people are able to communicate to others. Some objects exist solely to be a symbol of a non-tangible concept. We feel an emotion that is attached to the object. An object that has meaning for someone means it relates to a past experience (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton 1981 p. 21). Because we communicate through objects, studying these objects will allow for an understanding of our social lives.

Low levels of processing include operations like counting the letters in words and higher levels of processing might include forming semantic relationships such as understanding what the words’ meaning is. According to Craig and Lockhart who formulated this theory memory recall would improve as the information is processed in greater depth. However it has been hard to define exactly what depth is and it has been found that there are other factors that make people remember things. (Zachmeister, E.B., Nyberg 1982)

Interpretation bias has been found in studies using homophone, homonym, and the word-stem completion task. For example, Pincus et al. (1994) found individuals with chronic pain made more pain-related

The findings for this study revealed that both treatments led to improvements in the naming of trained words, and that there was no marked difference between the two treatments. “Generalized naming improvements were noted for three individuals with phonological anomia. GES improved the use of corresponding gestures for trained words.”(p.235-236) Results were largely maintained after treatment was completed. “It was noted that following the GES treatment, gesture use did increase which provided an opportunity for a compensatory method for individuals whose verbal skills did not

Wittenbrink, Judd, and Park (1997) studied eighty-eight people from the University of Colorado, who were in a psychology course, in order to receive points for their class. African Americans were not included. Caucasian American participants had to do three irrelevant assignments. One involved classifying to which race people belonged to according to first names. In this way, a connection with race categories was reinforced and was used as group primes. Following this, they had them do a response time assignment (out of awareness procedure), where they were asked if different strings of letters on the computer were a word or were not a word this was part of the Lexical Decision Task (LDT) (Wittenbrink, Judd, and Park, 1997). Before presenting the words

- The participants must say if they recognize items based on remembering rich details or associations to it

McArthur, G., Kohnen, S., Jones, K., Eve, P., Banales, E., Larsen, L., & Castles, A. (2015). Replicability of sight word training and

Human memory is flexible and prone to suggestion. “Human memory, while remarkable in many ways, does not operate like a video camera”

The second experiment is focused on semantic priming in accuracy paradigm. The prediction it was designed to address is whether ambiguous novel compounds facilitate recall accuracy to monomorphemic associates of both parsing choices. The procedure was altered by adapting the morpheme recall task and by having a pre or post primes compound

When the research participant in Test C1 focused on the way the words look, she recalled a lesser number of words compared to Test C2. The result was consistent with the researcher participant`s performance. In Test C2, the research participant used the model of the semantic network to connect the words by imagining that she is on the balcony eating a cookie and typing a story written by her about a farmer that found a treasure an alligator attacked him, so he killed it by a fork. Whereas in Test C1, she tried to combining the words in common groups to remember it. As a conclusion, the more meaningful the word is; the deeper the level of processing it is, and the easier to recall

For what type of problem is this treatment intended? This treatment is intended to improve speech production and use of informative language in persons with moderately severe non-fluent aphasia.

The results show that there were little phonemic paraphasias in the therapy treatment compared to the baseline phase. A similar decrease was evident in the client’s dysfluent hesitations, and rates of all other errors such as formal paraphasias and semantic paraphasias were lower during the therapy session (Fisher, Wilshire, & Ponsford, 2009). Word discrimination therapy demonstrated that gains were significantly faster for the words that were trained within phonologically related triplets compared to those trained in unrelated triplet sets. Following the therapy session, the client was reassessed during the maintenance testing after three months of post-therapy. The outcome indicated that the therapy gains were well maintained over time for both related and unrelated sets. The examination of error types showed that phonemic paraphasias, dysfluent hesitations, formal paraphasias, and semantic paraphasias remained well below when observed during baseline testing in both related and unrelated items during the treatment phases (Fisher, Wilshire, & Ponsford,

Why does training more complex, atypical category items result in generalization to typical items, while the reverse training procedure which is training less complex an typical items does not affect production of atypical items?. To clarify the potential mechanisms underlying the effect of typicality treatment, it is useful to concisely review theoretical models of word retrieval. Majority theoretical models of naming agree that lexical access can be generally divided into two processes, specifically, semantic and phonological processes. These models, on the other hand fall along a range when addressing the details concerning to the relative timing of lexical access. One observation of naming suggests two chronological components to lexical access, namely lexical selection followed by phonological encoding (Butterworth, 1989, 1992; Levelt, 1989; Levelt, Roelofs,&Meyer, 1999). A different observation of naming conjectures that lexical access can have two levels but not certainly two stages (Dell, 1986; Humphreys, Riddoch, & Quinlan, 1988). Hence, activation of a word during naming consists of at least two closely interacting levels which are activation of the semantic representation as well as activation of the phonological form of the target word. Some views also assume that perhaps an intermediate is activated, namely, lexeme level.

Memory has been and always will be associated with images. As early as 1896, leading psychologists were arguing that memory was nothing more than a continuous exchange of images. (Bergson) Later models of memory describe it as more of an image text; a combination of space and time, and image and word. (Yates) Although image certainly is not the only component of memory, it is undoubtedly an integral and essential part of memory's composition.

            Schemas are mental representation of knowledge built through experiences from people, situation or object.  Schema Theory is divided into three stages to get a better understanding of the memory processes which are “1. Encoding- Transforming sensory information to meaningful memory 2. Storage- Creates a biological trace of the memory, which is either consolidated or lost 3. Retrieval- using stores information all the time”. “Schema is seen as a kind of framework where some information is filled in and others are left blank”. Schema theory tries to approach the analysis of the world from a psychologist point of view which