| Abstract: |
BACKGROUND: For some individuals with aphasia, writing has been used as an alternative modality for communicating (e.g., Clausen and Beeson, 2003; Lustig and Tompkins, 2002). In some investigations where writing ability was treated; post-treatment and/or anecdotal reports indicated that verbal naming ability also improved for participants with aphasia (e.g., Beeson, Rising, and Volk, 2003; Kiran, 2005). In some recent studies, investigators have reported that written naming cueing can improve verbal naming ability (DeDe, Parris and Waters, 2003; Hillis, 1989). AIMS: The purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of a written cueing treatment programme on verbal naming ability in two adults with aphasia. METHOD AND PROCEDURES: Treatment involved using a written cueing hierarchy, which was modelled after Copy and Recall Treatment (CART; Beeson, 1999) and included verbal and writing components. A modified multiple probe across behaviours design was used to document individual participants' response to treatment. The design was replicated across each participant and included baseline, treatment, probe, and maintenance conditions. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Both participants improved their verbal naming ability for the target items over the course of treatment, but they responded differently to the treatment. One participant (P2) maintained verbal naming performance for the treated items 4 weeks after treatment ended and generalised to the untrained items; whereas the other participant (P1) did not. CONCLUSIONS: Results support and extend previous findings that treating in one modality improves performance in a different modality. Further, participants responded differently to the treatment, suggesting that underlying differences in the participants' deficits may account for why they responded differently to the same treatment. |
