The use of semiotic symbols as a means for measuring the identification of linguistic concepts for aphasic patients

The purpose of this study was to determine if any differences in the performances on two concept identification tests — the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts and the Synpro symbol identification test, existed 4 for aphasic adults.

The study included ten aphasic and ten normal subjects who were matched in age and education levels. The data consisted of the subjects responses to the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts and the Synpro symbol identification test. Measurements were recorded in terms of latency (milliseconds) and accuracy of the responses.

Statistical analysis of the data indicated that: 1) the aphasic adults performed better on the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts than the Synpro symbol identification test with ragard to accuracy; 2) the normal adults performed equally well on both the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts and the Synpro symbol identification test with regard to accuracy; 3) there was a significant difference in latency of response between the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts and the Synpro symbol identification test for the aphasic adult; 4) there was not a significant difference in latency of response on either of the two tests for the normal adults; 5) the normal adults performed significantly better than the aphasic adults on the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts and the Synpro symbol identification test in both latency and accuracy of responses; 6) there was a significant relationship between latency scores of the two populations on the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts; 7) there was a significant relationship between latency scores of the two populations on the Synpro symbol identification test; and 8) there was a significant difference between latency of correct and incorrect responses on the Synpro symbol identification test for the aphasic adults in that there was a greater reaction time for choice of incorrect responses as opposed to correct responses.