Dr. Hurley's Presentation: Primary Progressive Aphasia

I am glad that I was able to attend Dr. Robert Hurley’s presentation on primary progressive aphasia (PPA). This presentation was the first time I had heard of this syndrome and I was excited to learn about it. Now that we have discussed PPA in class, I have a more in depth understanding because of this presentation, as Dr. Hurley presented us with examples, the different types of PPA, as well as where as the research is headed on this syndrome.

Dr. Hurley mentioned several things in his presentation that I found particularly interesting. First, the example of a PPA patient who had a unimodal deficit. This patient was shown a picture of a celebrity. She recognized the celebrity but could not name it verbally. However, she was able to write down the name of the celebrity, and she was correct in the identification of the celebrity. It is rare that one sees a deficit this specific. Usually PPA affects many aspects of language, such as comprehension. Most deficits are multimodal.

Second, I found the findings of the word identification task to be particularly interesting. A PPA patient was shown a picture of a belt. They were then shown the words: belt, hat, pair and broom. Although the participants affected by PPA did not correctly choose “belt,” they did select a word from the same semantic category, which in this example was “hat.” I found it interesting that these patients displayed some level of comprehension of meaning, even though they were not able to correctly identify the correct word.

This presentation also taught me many new things that are not always specific to PPA. For example, I learned more about functional neuroimaging. When speaking about research on the temporal pole, Dr.Hurley mentioned that this region is “fMRI shy” because it is difficult to get a clear image of the temporal pole using fMRI. The temporal pole is near sinuses which contain air. This air blurs the fMRI image. Because this area cannot be clearly captured by an fMRI, it is called an “artifact” and additional measures must be taken to obtain data and images from this region.

Also not specific to PPA, Dr. Hurley's presentation reminded me of a valuable lesson: to challenge what is believed, whether it is believed by me or it is believed by others. A theory is a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles ofexplanation and prediction for a class of phenomena (dictionary.com). Dr. Hurley talked about the Semantic Hub Theory, which theorizes that the temporal pole is a task dependent representation. Although this theory is believed by many, Dr. Hurley and his  colleagues challenged it. They do not accept the findings of the Semantic Hub Theory simply because others believe in them. Instead, Dr. Hurley and his colleagues challenged it by developing and testing a theory of their own: the Calls Theory. Not only have they challenged the Semantic Hub Theory, they continue to challenge there own theory and findings. I, personally, am too quick to believe what I hear when it comes to research findings. I'll think, "oh that makes sense" and just stop there. This is human nature for many people as well, as discussed by Gary Marcus in "Kluge." In "Kluge," Marcus suggested ways to train our thinking so that we are less likely to fall victim to our kluge of a mind. These suggestions can be applied to my tendency to believe in research findings without considering alternatives. Dr. Hurley reminded me of the importance of Gary Marcus's suggestions: to ask further questions, challenge the results, and to think in non-conventional ways. 

I am glad that I was able to hear Dr. Hurley speak. I am thankful for the new information about primary progressive aphasia, neuroimaging, and am especially grateful for the reminder to challenge research findings, no matter how much sense they may make, and to challenge the way I have evolved to think.