ادغام متنی انسجام سببی در افراد مبتلا به سندرم ویلیامز
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|40141||2013||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 7232 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Research in Developmental Disabilities, Volume 34, Issue 10, October 2013, Pages 3332–3342
This study investigated causal coherence in people with Williams syndrome (WS). To advance our understanding of this clinical group, we examined their ability to make causal inferences, using their understanding of homonyms (words with the same spelling but distinct meanings) embedded in contexts. A minor goal was to use verbal stimuli to clarify Santos and Deruelle's (2009) findings on the knowledge of causality among people with WS. Participants were presented with two types of scenarios requiring different inference directions: backward inferences (from consequence to cause) and forward inferences (from cause to consequence). Following each scenario, they were asked a comprehension question and given three possible answers that corresponded to a figurative, literal, and unrelated meaning of the homonym embedded in the scenario. The correct answer required the participants to make a successful causal inference. People with WS aged from 13 to 29 (n = 17, mental age = 6–14) were able to make backward and forward inferences by selecting the context-appropriate meanings of homonyms, thus demonstrating the existence of contextual integration ability in the causal coherence of people with WS. However, as their accuracy in the figurative meaning responses was lower than that of healthy age-matched controls, suggesting the participants with WS, were delayed in the contextual integration of causal coherence. The participants with WS chose a significantly higher percentage of answers with unrelated meanings than the two control groups, indicating a certain degree of weakness in the contextual integration of homonyms in context.