↓ Skip to main content

How to engage the right brain hemisphere in aphasics without even singing: evidence for two paths of speech recovery

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How to engage the right brain hemisphere in aphasics without even singing: evidence for two paths of speech recovery
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00035
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin Stahl, Ilona Henseler, Robert Turner, Stefan Geyer, Sonja A. Kotz

Abstract

There is an ongoing debate as to whether singing helps left-hemispheric stroke patients recover from non-fluent aphasia through stimulation of the right hemisphere. According to recent work, it may not be singing itself that aids speech production in non-fluent aphasic patients, but rhythm and lyric type. However, the long-term effects of melody and rhythm on speech recovery are largely unknown. In the current experiment, we tested 15 patients with chronic non-fluent aphasia who underwent either singing therapy, rhythmic therapy, or standard speech therapy. The experiment controlled for phonatory quality, vocal frequency variability, pitch accuracy, syllable duration, phonetic complexity and other influences, such as the acoustic setting and learning effects induced by the testing itself. The results provide the first evidence that singing and rhythmic speech may be similarly effective in the treatment of non-fluent aphasia. This finding may challenge the view that singing causes a transfer of language function from the left to the right hemisphere. Instead, both singing and rhythmic therapy patients made good progress in the production of common, formulaic phrases-known to be supported by right corticostriatal brain areas. This progress occurred at an early stage of both therapies and was stable over time. Conversely, patients receiving standard therapy made less progress in the production of formulaic phrases. They did, however, improve their production of non-formulaic speech, in contrast to singing and rhythmic therapy patients, who did not. In light of these results, it may be worth considering the combined use of standard therapy and the training of formulaic phrases, whether sung or rhythmically spoken. Standard therapy may engage, in particular, left perilesional brain regions, while training of formulaic phrases may open new ways of tapping into right-hemisphere language resources-even without singing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
Unknown 188 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 14%
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Researcher 23 12%
Professor 14 7%
Other 34 17%
Unknown 36 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 35 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 11%
Linguistics 20 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 9%
Neuroscience 16 8%
Other 40 20%
Unknown 48 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2023.
All research outputs
#7,684,893
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,010
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,754
of 293,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#392
of 860 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 293,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 860 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.