Comprehension of Indirect Requests by Persons with Fluent Aphasia

Abstract

This study examined the judgments and response latencies of 10 participants with aphasia and 10 participants without aphasia for responses to indirect requests. Modals such as can and should were drawn from 5 indirect request categories. There was a significant difference in judgment errors and response latency between participants with and without aphasia. There were no significant differences between aphasic participants' judgments for literal versus nonliteral contrasts. There was a significant effect among the modals and among the categories of indirect requests. Response latency reflected aphasic participants' understanding of these indirect requests.