In this report I synthesize the skills and knowledge I gained through a clinical practicum at Touchstone Family Association. I present two metaphors to conceptualize therapeutic change. The first model conceptualizes the therapeutic process as a geography introduced by the client to the counsellor. The second model conceptualizes the relationship between thought, emotion, and behaviour as a framework to help me visualize the client as they move towards change. These reflections are supported by a literature that finds that positive therapeutic outcomes are attributed to context and relationship. --Leaf iii.
The effect of semantic distance (Lund & Burgess, 1996) was examined in three semantic categorization experiments. Experiment 1, a yes/no task that required participants to make animal/nonanimal judgments by responding to both sets of stimuli (Forster & Shen, 1996), revealed no effect of semantic distance. Experiment 2, a go/no-go task that required participants to respond to only the experimental (i.e., nonanimal) items, revealed a large effect of semantic distance. In addition, response latencies were longer and error rates were lower to the experimental items in Experiment 2 than to those in Experiment 1. These findings were replicated in Experiment 3, in which semantic distance and task condition were manipulated within subjects. We conclude that these results are consistent with (1) the view that the go/no-go tasks elicited more extensive processing of the experimental items and (2) a connectionist account of semantic activation, whereby processing is facilitated by the presence of semantic neighbors. Reprinted by permission of the publisher.; The effect of semantic distance (Lund & Burgess, 1996) was examined in three semantic categorization experiments. Experiment 1, a yes/no task that required participants to make animal/nonanimal judgments by responding to both sets of stimuli (Forster & Shen, 1996), revealed no effect of semantic distance. Experiment 2, a go/no-go task that required participants to respond to only the experimental (i.e., nonanimal) items, revealed a large effect of semantic distance. In addition, response latencies were longer and error rates were lower to the experimental items in Experiment 2 than to those in Experiment 1. These findings were replicated in Experiment 3, in which semantic distance and task condition were manipulated within subjects. We conclude that these results are consistent with (1) the view that the go/no-go tasks elicited more extensive processing of the experimental items and (2) a connectionist account of semantic activation, whereby processing is facilitated by the presence of semantic neighbors.; The effect of semantic distance (Lund & Burgess, 1996) was examined in three semantic categorization experiments. Experiment 1, a yes/no task that required participants to make animal/nonanimal judgments by responding to both sets of stimuli (Forster & Shen, 1996), revealed no effect of semantic distance. Experiment 2, a go/no-go task that required participants to respond to only the experimental (i.e., nonanimal) items, revealed a large effect of semantic distance. In addition, response latencies were longer and error rates were lower to the experimental items in Experiment 2 than to those in Experiment 1. These findings were replicated in Experiment 3, in which semantic distance and task condition were manipulated within subjects. We conclude that these results are consistent with (1) the view that the go/no-go tasks elicited more extensive processing of the experimental items and (2) a connectionist account of semantic activation, whereby processing is facilitated by the presence of semantic neighbors.; The effect of semantic distance (Lund & Burgess, 1996) was examined in three semantic categorization experiments. Experiment 1, a yes/no task that required participants to make animal/nonanimal judgments by responding to both sets of stimuli (Forster & Shen, 1996), revealed no effect of semantic distance. Experiment 2, a go/no-go task that required participants to respond to only the experimental (i.e., nonanimal) items, revealed a large effect of semantic distance. In addition, response latencies were longer and error rates were lower to the experimental items in Experiment 2 than to those in Experiment 1. These findings were replicated in Experiment 3, in which semantic distance and task condition were manipulated within subjects. We conclude that these results are consistent with (1) the view that the go/no-go tasks elicited more extensive processing of the experimental items and (2) a connectionist account of semantic activation, whereby processing is facilitat d by the presence of semantic neighbors.
We report a patient (B.V.) who appears to suffer from two dyslexic disorders. First, B.V. showed a severe impairment in reading aloud nonwords (e.g., reading TREST as TREE), in addition to making several semantic errors when reading aloud words (e.g., reading ILL as SICK) and in picture naming (e.g., responding KNIFE to a picture of a FORK). These results suggest that B.V. suffers from deep dyslexia. Second, B.V. showed an impairment in reading the final letters of both words and nonwords (e.g., reading SHOWN as SHORT and reading PROGE as PROOF). Thus, it appears that B.V. also suffers from neglect dyslexia. We discuss how these two forms of dyslexia could be interacting to account for B.V.'s pattern of errors in reading aloud words and nonwords and in picture naming.; We report a patient (B.V.) who appears to suffer from two dyslexic disorders. First, B.V. showed a severe impairment in reading aloud nonwords (e.g., reading TREST as TREE), in addition to making several semantic errors when reading aloud words (e.g., reading ILL as SICK) and in picture naming (e.g., responding KNIFE to a picture of a FORK). These results suggest that B.V. suffers from deep dyslexia. Second, B.V. showed an impairment in reading the final letters of both words and nonwords (e.g., reading SHOWN as SHORT and reading PROGE as PROOF). Thus, it appears that B.V. also suffers from neglect dyslexia. We discuss how these two forms of dyslexia could be interacting to account for B.V.'s pattern of errors in reading aloud words and nonwords and in picture naming.
Orthographic and phonological processing skills have been shown to vary as a function of reader skill (Stanovich & West, Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402-433, 1989; Unsworth & Pexman, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 63-81, 2003). One variable known to contribute to differences between readers of higher and lower skill is amount of print exposure: higher skilled readers read more often than lower skilled readers, and their increased print exposure is associated with faster responding to words and nonwords in lexical decision tasks. The present experiments examined the effect of print exposure on the word frequency effect and neighborhood size effect. We conclude that the different outcomes reported in previous studies (Chateau & Jared, Memory and Cognition, 28, 143-153, 2000; Lewellen, Goldinger, Pisoni, & Greene, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 316-330, 1993) were due to the type of nonwords used in the lexical decision task (regular nonwords versus pseudohomophones). Our results are explained in terms of differences in the reliance on orthographic and phonological information between readers of higher and lower print exposure.; Orthographic and phonological processing skills have been shown to vary as a function of reader skill (Stanovich & West, Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433, 1989; Unsworth & Pexman, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 63–81, 2003). One variable known to contribute to differences between readers of higher and lower skill is amount of print exposure: higher skilled readers read more often than lower skilled readers, and their increased print exposure is associated with faster responding to words and nonwords in lexical decision tasks. The present experiments examined the effect of print exposure on the word frequency effect and neighborhood size effect. We conclude that the different outcomes reported in previous studies (Chateau & Jared, Memory and Cognition, 28, 143–153, 2000; Lewellen, Goldinger, Pisoni, & Greene, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 316–330, 1993) were due to the type of nonwords used in the lexical decision task (regular nonwords versus pseudohomophones). Our results are explained in terms of differences in the reliance on orthographic and phonological information between readers of higher and lower print exposure.; Orthographic and phonological processing skills have been shown to vary as a function of reader skill (Stanovich & West, Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402-433, 1989; Unsworth & Pexman, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 63-81, 2003). One variable known to contribute to differences between readers of higher and lower skill is amount of print exposure: higher skilled readers read more often than lower skilled readers, and their increased print exposure is associated with faster responding to words and nonwords in lexical decision tasks. The present experiments examined the effect of print exposure on the word frequency effect and neighborhood size effect. We conclude that the different outcomes reported in previous studies (Chateau & Jared, Memory and Cognition, 28, 143-153, 2000; Lewellen, Goldinger, Pisoni, & Greene, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 316-330, 1993) were due to the type of nonwords used in the lexical decision task (regular nonwords versus pseudohomophones). Our results are explained in terms of differences in the reliance on orthographic and phonological information between readers of higher and lower print exposure.
We investigated the influence of exposure to phonologically similar words on four-year-olds' acquisition of novel object words. In Experiment 1, hearing phonological neighbours BEFORE learning a new word did not influence children's novel word productions. In Experiment 2, when children heard the phonological neighbours of a novel word AFTER learning a new word, they correctly produced the target word more often than children who did not receive this exposure. These findings suggest that exposing children to similar sounding words after a novel word was introduced may have helped maintain a representation of that word in working memory, leading to enhanced word learning. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]; We investigated the influence of exposure to phonologically similar words on four-year-olds' acquisition of novel object words. In Experiment 1, hearing phonological neighbours before learning a new word did not influence children's novel word productions. In Experiment 2, when children heard the phonological neighbours of a novel word after learning a new word, they correctly produced the target word more often than children who did not receive this exposure. These findings suggest that exposing children to similar sounding words after a novel word was introduced may have helped maintain a representation of that word in working memory, leading to enhanced word learning.; We investigated the influence of exposure to phonologically similar words on four-year-olds' acquisition of novel object words. In Experiment 1, hearing phonological neighbours before learning a new word did not influence children's novel word productions. In Experiment 2, when children heard the phonological neighbours of a novel word after learning a new word, they correctly produced the target word more often than children who did not receive this exposure. These findings suggest that exposing children to similar sounding words after a novel word was introduced may have helped maintain a representation of that word in working memory, leading to enhanced word learning.
