Publications

Displaying 1 - 12 of 12
  • Mooijman, S., Schoonen, R., Goral, M., Roelofs, A., & Ruiter, M. B. (2025). Why do bilingual speakers with aphasia alternate between languages? A study into their experiences and mixing patterns. Aphasiology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/02687038.2025.2452928.

    Abstract

    Background

    The factors that contribute to language alternation by bilingual speakers with aphasia have been debated. Some studies suggest that atypical language mixing results from impairments in language control, while others posit that mixing is a way to enhance communicative effectiveness. To address this question, most prior research examined the appropriateness of language mixing in connected speech tasks.
    Aims

    The goal of this study was to provide new insight into the question whether language mixing in aphasia reflects a strategy to enhance verbal effectiveness or involuntary behaviour resulting from impaired language control.
    Methods & procedures

    Semi-structured web-based interviews with bilingual speakers with aphasia (N = 19) with varying language backgrounds were conducted. The interviews were transcribed and coded for: (1) Self-reports regarding language control and compensation, (2) instances of language mixing, and (3) in two cases, instances of repair initiation.
    Outcomes & results

    The results showed that several participants reported language control difficulties but that the knowledge of additional languages could also be recruited to compensate for lexical retrieval problems. Most participants showed no or very few instances of mixing and the observed mixes appeared to adhere to the pragmatic context and known functions of switching. Three participants exhibited more marked switching behaviour and reported corresponding difficulties with language control. Instances of atypical mixing did not coincide with clear problems initiating conversational repair.
    Conclusions

    Our study highlights the variability in language mixing patterns of bilingual speakers with aphasia. Furthermore, most of the individuals in the study appeared to be able to effectively control their languages, and to alternate between their languages for compensatory purposes. Control deficits resulting in atypical language mixing were observed in a small number of participants.
  • Piai, V., Roelofs, A., Acheson, D. J., & Takashima, A. (2013). Attention for speaking: Neural substrates of general and specific mechanisms for monitoring and control. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7: 832. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00832.

    Abstract

    Accumulating evidence suggests that some degree of attentional control is required to regulate and monitor processes underlying speaking. Although progress has been made in delineating the neural substrates of the core language processes involved in speaking, substrates associated with regulatory and monitoring processes have remained relatively underspecified. We report the results of an fMRI study examining the neural substrates related to performance in three attention-demanding tasks varying in the amount of linguistic processing: vocal picture naming while ignoring distractors (picture-word interference, PWI); vocal color naming while ignoring distractors (Stroop); and manual object discrimination while ignoring spatial position (Simon task). All three tasks had congruent and incongruent stimuli, while PWI and Stroop also had neutral stimuli. Analyses focusing on common activation across tasks identified a portion of the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) that was active in incongruent trials for all three tasks, suggesting that this region subserves a domain-general attentional control function. In the language tasks, this area showed increased activity for incongruent relative to congruent stimuli, consistent with the involvement of domain-general mechanisms of attentional control in word production. The two language tasks also showed activity in anterior-superior temporal gyrus (STG). Activity increased for neutral PWI stimuli (picture and word did not share the same semantic category) relative to incongruent (categorically related) and congruent stimuli. This finding is consistent with the involvement of language-specific areas in word production, possibly related to retrieval of lexical-semantic information from memory. The current results thus suggest that in addition to engaging language-specific areas for core linguistic processes, speaking also engages the ACC, a region that is likely implementing domain-general attentional control.
  • Piai, V., Roelofs, A., Jensen, O., Schoffelen, J.-M., & Bonnefond, M. (2013). Distinct patterns of brain activity characterize lexical activation and competition in speech production [Abstract]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25 Suppl., 106.

    Abstract

    A fundamental ability of speakers is to
    quickly retrieve words from long-term memory. According to a prominent theory, concepts activate multiple associated words, which enter into competition for selection. Previous electrophysiological studies have provided evidence for the activation of multiple alternative words, but did not identify brain responses refl ecting competition. We report a magnetoencephalography study examining the timing and neural substrates of lexical activation and competition. The degree of activation of competing words was
    manipulated by presenting pictures (e.g., dog) simultaneously with distractor
    words. The distractors were semantically related to the picture name (cat), unrelated (pin), or identical (dog). Semantic distractors are stronger competitors to the picture name, because they receive additional activation from the picture, whereas unrelated distractors do not. Picture naming times were longer with semantic than with unrelated and identical distractors. The patterns of phase-locked and non-phase-locked activity were distinct
    but temporally overlapping. Phase-locked activity in left middle temporal
    gyrus, peaking at 400 ms, was larger on unrelated than semantic and identical trials, suggesting differential effort in processing the alternative words activated by the picture-word stimuli. Non-phase-locked activity in the 4-10 Hz range between 400-650 ms in left superior frontal gyrus was larger on semantic than unrelated and identical trials, suggesting different
    degrees of effort in resolving the competition among the alternatives
    words, as refl ected in the naming times. These findings characterize distinct
    patterns of brain activity associated with lexical activation and competition
    respectively, and their temporal relation, supporting the theory that words are selected by competition.
  • Piai, V., & Roelofs, A. (2013). Working memory capacity and dual-task interference in picture naming. Acta Psychologica, 142, 332-342. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.01.006.
  • Roelofs, A., & Piai, V. (2013). Associative facilitation in the Stroop task: Comment on Mahon et al. Cortex, 49, 1767-1769. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2013.03.001.

    Abstract

    First paragraph: A fundamental issue in psycholinguistics concerns how speakers retrieve intended words from long-term memory. According to a selection by competition account (e.g., Levelt
    et al., 1999), conceptually driven word retrieval involves the activation of a set of candidate words and a competitive selection
    of the intended word from this set.
  • Roelofs, A., Piai, V., & Schriefers, H. (2013). Context effects and selective attention in picture naming and word reading: Competition versus response exclusion. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 655-671. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.615663.

    Abstract

    For several decades, context effects in picture naming and word reading have been extensively investigated. However, researchers have found no agreement on the explanation of the effects. Whereas it has long been assumed that several types of effect reflect competition in word selection, recently it has been argued that these effects reflect the exclusion of articulatory responses from an output buffer. Here, we first critically evaluate the findings on context effects in picture naming that have been taken as evidence against the competition account, and we argue that the findings are, in fact, compatible with the competition account. Moreover, some of the findings appear to challenge rather than support the response exclusion account. Next, we compare the response exclusion and competition accounts with respect to their ability to explain data on word reading. It appears that response exclusion does not account well for context effects on word reading times, whereas computer simulations reveal that a competition model like WEAVER++ accounts for the findings.

    Files private

    Request files
  • Roelofs, A., Dijkstra, T., & Gerakaki, S. (2013). Modeling of word translation: Activation flow from concepts to lexical items. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 343-353. doi:10.1017/S1366728912000612.

    Abstract

    Whereas most theoretical and computational models assume a continuous flow of activation from concepts to lexical items in spoken word production, one prominent model assumes that the mapping of concepts onto words happens in a discrete fashion (Bloem & La Heij, 2003). Semantic facilitation of context pictures on word translation has been taken to support the discrete-flow model. Here, we report results of computer simulations with the continuous-flow WEAVER++ model (Roelofs, 1992, 2006) demonstrating that the empirical observation taken to be in favor of discrete models is, in fact, only consistent with those models and equally compatible with more continuous models of word production by monolingual and bilingual speakers. Continuous models are specifically and independently supported by other empirical evidence on the effect of context pictures on native word production.
  • Roelofs, A., Piai, V., & Schriefers, H. (2013). Selection by competition in word production: Rejoinder to Janssen (2012). Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 679-683. doi:10.1080/01690965.2013.770890.

    Abstract

    Roelofs, Piai, and Schriefers argue that several findings on the effect of distractor words and pictures in producing words support a selection-by-competition account and challenge a non-competitive response-exclusion account. Janssen argues that the findings do not challenge response exclusion, and he conjectures that both competitive and non-competitive mechanisms underlie word selection. Here, we maintain that the findings do challenge the response-exclusion account and support the assumption of a single competitive mechanism underlying word selection.

    Files private

    Request files
  • Shao, Z., Meyer, A. S., & Roelofs, A. (2013). Selective and nonselective inhibition of competitors in picture naming. Memory & Cognition, 41(8), 1200-1211. doi:10.3758/s13421-013-0332-7.

    Abstract

    The present study examined the relation between nonselective inhibition and selective inhibition in picture naming performance. Nonselective inhibition refers to the ability to suppress any unwanted response, whereas selective inhibition refers to the ability to suppress specific competing responses. The degree of competition in picture naming was manipulated by presenting targets along with distractor words that could be semantically related (e.g., a picture of a dog combined with the word cat) or unrelated (tree) to the picture name. The mean naming response time (RT) was longer in the related than in the unrelated condition, reflecting semantic interference. Delta plot analyses showed that participants with small mean semantic interference effects employed selective inhibition more effectively than did participants with larger semantic interference effects. The participants were also tested on the stop-signal task, which taps nonselective inhibition. Their performance on this task was correlated with their mean naming RT but, importantly, not with the selective inhibition indexed by the delta plot analyses and the magnitude of the semantic interference effect. These results indicate that nonselective inhibition ability and selective inhibition of competitors in picture naming are separable to some extent.
  • Roelofs, A., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1998). A case for the lemma/lexeme distinction in models of speaking: Comment on Caramazza and Miozzo (1997). Cognition, 69(2), 219-230. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00056-0.

    Abstract

    In a recent series of papers, Caramazza and Miozzo [Caramazza, A., 1997. How many levels of processing are there in lexical access? Cognitive Neuropsychology 14, 177-208; Caramazza, A., Miozzo, M., 1997. The relation between syntactic and phonological knowledge in lexical access: evidence from the 'tip-of-the-tongue' phenomenon. Cognition 64, 309-343; Miozzo, M., Caramazza, A., 1997. On knowing the auxiliary of a verb that cannot be named: evidence for the independence of grammatical and phonological aspects of lexical knowledge. Journal of Cognitive Neuropsychology 9, 160-166] argued against the lemma/lexeme distinction made in many models of lexical access in speaking, including our network model [Roelofs, A., 1992. A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. Cognition 42, 107-142; Levelt, W.J.M., Roelofs, A., Meyer, A.S., 1998. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, (in press)]. Their case was based on the observations that grammatical class deficits of brain-damaged patients and semantic errors may be restricted to either spoken or written forms and that the grammatical gender of a word and information about its form can be independently available in tip-of-the-tongue stales (TOTs). In this paper, we argue that though our model is about speaking, not taking position on writing, extensions to writing are possible that are compatible with the evidence from aphasia and speech errors. Furthermore, our model does not predict a dependency between gender and form retrieval in TOTs. Finally, we argue that Caramazza and Miozzo have not accounted for important parts of the evidence motivating the lemma/lexeme distinction, such as word frequency effects in homophone production, the strict ordering of gender and pho neme access in LRP data, and the chronometric and speech error evidence for the production of complex morphology.
  • Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1998). Metrical structure in planning the production of spoken words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 922-939. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.4.922.

    Abstract

    According to most models of speech production, the planning of spoken words involves the independent retrieval of segments and metrical frames followed by segment-to-frame association. In some models, the metrical frame includes a specification of the number and ordering of consonants and vowels, but in the word-form encoding by activation and verification (WEAVER) model (A. Roelofs, 1997), the frame specifies only the stress pattern across syllables. In 6 implicit priming experiments, on each trial, participants produced 1 word out of a small set as quickly as possible. In homogeneous sets, the response words shared word-initial segments, whereas in heterogeneous sets, they did not. Priming effects from shared segments depended on all response words having the same number of syllables and stress pattern, but not on their having the same number of consonants and vowels. No priming occurred when the response words had only the same metrical frame but shared no segments. Computer simulations demonstrated that WEAVER accounts for the findings.
  • Roelofs, A. (1998). Rightward incrementality in encoding simple phrasal forms in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 904-921. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.4.904.

    Abstract

    This article reports 7 experiments investigating whether utterances are planned in a parallel or rightward incremental fashion during language production. The experiments examined the role of linear order, length, frequency, and repetition in producing Dutch verb–particle combinations. On each trial, participants produced 1 utterance out of a set of 3 as quickly as possible. The responses shared part of their form or not. For particle-initial infinitives, facilitation was obtained when the responses shared the particle but not when they shared the verb. For verb-initial imperatives, however, facilitation was obtained for the verbs but not for the particles. The facilitation increased with length, decreased with frequency, and was independent of repetition. A simple rightward incremental model accounts quantitatively for the results.

Share this page