Linked Life Data

15871605

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/15871605

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
3
pubmed:dateCreated
2005-5-5
pubmed:abstractText
This article considers Ullman and Pierpont's Procedural Deficit theory of Specific Language Impairment (SLI). The theory represents an innovative attempt to fill the gap between brain and cognition in SLI, and has the potential to explain the non-linguistic as well as linguistic deficits seen in this disorder. The theory is reviewed with regard to: (1) the claims it makes on the domain-specificity of language structures; (2) the falsifiability conditions of the theory; (3) the level of detail at which compensatory processes are specified; and (4) from a computational perspective, whether the inferences that the theory draws from uneven behavioural impairments to underlying structural deficits are necessary ones.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Jun
pubmed:issn
0010-9452
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
41
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
434-42
pubmed:dateRevised
2009-11-11
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2005
pubmed:articleTitle
Characterising compensation. (Commentary on Ullman and Pierpont, "Specific language impairment is not specific to language: the procedural deficit hypothesis").
pubmed:affiliation
School of Psychology, Birkbeck College, University of London, UK. m.thomas@bbk.ac.uk
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comment, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't