Acta Scientific Otolaryngology (ASOL) (ISSN: 2582-5550)

Research Article Volume 3 Issue 9

Confrontation Naming and Generative Naming in Dementia: A Comparison

Deepthi Vivek V1* and Amirtha Varshini MJ2

1Audiologist and Speech Language Pathologist, Private Practice, India
2Professor, Department of Speech and Hearing, MERF-Institute of Speech and Hearing, India

*Corresponding Author: Deepthi Vivek V, Audiologist and Speech Language Pathologist, Private Practice, India.

Received: July 20, 2021; Published: August 16, 2021


  The Picture naming test is a widely accepted method to assess the cognitive deterioration in patients with Dementia. It is presumed to require access to semantic memory and so would be a valuable tool in analysing the nature of semantic deterioration. Language functioning and social performance has been to gradually decrease with progression of the disease. The aim of this study was to identify the differences between confrontation naming and generative or divergent naming in patients with dementia of Alzheimer’s type and to provide insight into the representations within semantic memory. Both of these naming tasks have been found to be effective in identifying dementia as well as provide insight into the progression of the disease. Confrontation naming involves direct selection of a semantic memory category in response to a visually presented stimulus. Divergent naming includes accessing a multitude of words that are triggered by the presentation of auditory stimuli. The confrontation naming task used was picture naming and the generative or divergent naming task was verbal fluency task. The current study considered a control group (30) and an experimental group with age and gender matched individuals (30). The picture naming task consisted of 20 pictures of commonly used everyday objects. Category Fluency Task with Subtask I (living) and subtask II (non-living) was used. There was a noticeable difference in performance in both tasks between the control group and experimental group. It is also important to note that the experimental group performed significantly lower in the divergent naming task compared to the confrontational naming task. This might be attributed to the presence of the visual stimuli contributing as a cue in the confrontation naming task. Divergent naming or Category fluency necessitates the recall of multiple responses from a hierarchically and categorically organised information. This indicates that naming tasks can be used to identify semantic deterioration, thereby aiding in the early diagnosis and intervention of individuals with Dementia.

Keywords: Dementia; Naming; Semantic Memory; Confrontation naming; Divergent Naming


  1. Eduardo C., et al. “The Neuroanatomical, Neurophysiological and Psychological Basis of Memory: Current Models and Their Origins”. Frontiers in Pharmacology (2017).
  2. Binder J., et al. “The Neurobiology of Semantic Memory”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences11 (2011): 527-536.
  3. Mahon BZ and Caramazza A. “A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content”. Journal of Physiology Paris1-3 (2008): 59-70.
  4. Miller KM., et al. “Auditory Responsive Naming versus Visual Confrontation naming in Dementia”. The Clinical Neuropsychologist (2009): 103-118.
  5. Brandt J., et al. “Auditory Confrontation Naming in Alzheimer’s Disease”. Clinical Neuropsychology8 (2010): 1326-1338.
  6. Tulving E. “Episodic and Semantic Memory” (1972).
  7. Hodges JR., et al. “Semantic Memory Impairment in Alzheimer’s Disease: failure of Access or Degraded knowledge?”. Neuropsychologia4 (1992): 301-314.
  8. Thompson-schill L. “Neuroimaging Studies of Semantic Memory: inferring “how” from “where”. Neuropsychologia3 (2003): 280-292.
  9. Molloy WD and Lubinski R. “Dementia: Impact and clinical perspectives”. In R. Lubinski (Edition.), Dementia and communication (1991): 2-21.
  10. Stella Karantzoulis and James E Galvin. “Distinguishing Alzheimer’s disease from other major forms of dementia”. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics11 (2011): 1579-1591.
  11. Mummery CJ., et al. “A voxel-based morphometry study of semantic dementia: Relationship between temporal lobe atrophy and semantic memory”. Annals of Neurology1 (2000): 36-45.
  12. Kertesz A. “Western Aphasia Battery” (1982).
  13. D’cruz SM., et al. “The effect of aging on verbal fluency in South Indians”. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences (IOSR-JDMS)3 (2013): 40-42.
  14. Hodges JR and Patterson K. “Nonfluent progressive aphasia and semantic dementia: a comparative neuropsychological study”. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 2 (1996): 511-524.
  15. Silagi M., et al. “Naming Ability in patients with Mild to Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease: What changes occur with the evolution of the disease?” Clinics 6 (2015): 423-428.
  16. Kershner HS., et al. “The naming Disorder of Dementia”. Neuropsychologia1 (1984): 23-30.
  17. Weiner Neubecker and Bret Hynan. “Language in Alzheimer’s Disease”. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 8 (2008): 1223-1227.
  18. Anju EV., et al. “Semantic Memory in Dementia of Alzheimer’s Type”. Presented in TAN - ISHA (2013).
  19. Martin A. “Semantic knowledge in patients with Alzheimer’s disease: evidence for degraded representation”. Advances in Psychology 89 (1992): 119-134.
  20. Melrose RJ., et al. “The neural correlates of naming and fluency deficits in Alzheimer’s disease: an FDG-PET study”. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 8 (2009): 885-893.
  21. Cormier P., et al. “Contribution of perceptual and lexical semantic errors to the naming impairments in Alzheimer’s disease”. Percept Mot Skills1 (1991): 175-183.
  22. Passafiume D., et al. “Reading latency of words and nonwords in Alzheimer’s patients”. Cortex2 (2000): 293-298.
  23. Nebes RD and Brady CB. “Generalized cognitive slowing and severity of dementia in Alzheimer’s Disease: Implications for the interpretation of response time data”. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology2 (1992): 317-326.
  24. Bayles KA and Tomoeda CK. “Confrontational naming impairment in dementia”. Brain Lang 19 (1983): 98-114.
  25. Hodges JR and Patterson K. “Is semantic memory consistently impaired early in the course of Alzheimer’s disease? Neuroanatomical and diagnostic implications”. Neuropsychologia 33 (1995): 441-459.
  26. Nebes RD. “Cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer’s disease”. In F. I. Craik and T. A. Salthouse (Editions.), The handbook of aging and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association (1992).
  27. Rogers SL and Friedman RB. “The Underlying Mechanisms of Semantic Memory Loss in Alzheimer’s Disease and Semantic Dementia”. Neuropsychologia1 (2008): 12-21.
  28. Brandt J and Manning JK. “Patterns of word list generation in Mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimers disease”. Clinical Neuropsychology 23 (2009): 870-879.
  29. Hodges JR., et al. “Differential impairment of semantic and episodic memory in Alzheimer’s and Huntington’s disease: a controlled prospective study”. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychology 53 (1990): 1089-1095.
  30. Hodges JR., et al. “Semantic dementia: Progressive fluent aphasia with temporal lobe atrophy”. Brain 115 (1990): 1783-1806.
  31. Arroyo-Anlló EM., et al. “Verbal fluency in Alzheimer’s disease and Aphasia”. Dementia1 (2011): 5-18.
  32. Marczinski CA and Kertesz A. “Category and letter fluency in semantic dementia, primary progressive aphasia, and Alzheimer’s disease”. Brain and Language3 (2006): 258-226.
  33. Martin and Chao. “Semantic memory and the brain: structure and processes”. Current Opinions in Neurobiology 11 (2001): 194-201.
  34. Yasmeen FS., et al. “Comparison of animal, action and Phonemic fluency in Aphasia”. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders2 (2017): 370-384.
  35. Adlam AL., et al. “Semantic knowledge in mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer’s disease”. Cortex5 (2006): 675-684.
  36. Vogel A., et al. “Semantic memory impairment in the earliest phases of Alzheimer’s disease”. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders 19 (2005): 75-81.
  37. Kerns J., et al. “Word Production in Schizophrenia and its relationship to positive symptoms”. Psychiatric Research1 (1999): 29-37.
  38. Joyce EM., et al. “Verbal Fluency in schizophrenia: relationship with executive function, semantic memory and clinical alogia”. Psychological Medicine1 (1996): 39-49.
  39. Goldberg TE., et al. “Cognitive Substrates of thought disorder, I: the Semantic system”. The American Journal of Psychiatry12 (1998): 1671-1676.
  40. Huff FJ., et al. “Semantic Impairment and Anomia in Alzheimer’s disease”. Brain and Language2 (1986): 235-249.
  41. Hodges JR and K Patterson. “Nonfluent progressive aphasia and Semantic dementia: a comparative neuropsychological study”. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society: JINS6 (1996): 511-524.


Citation: Deepthi Vivek V and Amirtha Varshini MJ. “Confrontation Naming and Generative Naming in Dementia: A Comparison".Acta Scientific Otolaryngology 3.9 (2020): 23-33.


Acceptance rate34%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days
Impact Factor0.871

Indexed In

News and Events

  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is May 20, 2024.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of "Best Article of the Issue"
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.

Contact US