Semantic Feature Analysis

XX, XX, XX, & Lauren Berusch

Overview
SFA is a therapy technique that focuses on the meaning based properties
of words. This is done via spoken production of the target word, usually prompted with picture
stimulus and through answering questions that elicit the semantic features of the target.

Treatment
Candidates:

For adults, SFA is a

great intervention when
they have impairments
at the semantic level or
in accessing word
forms. Most clients with
Aphasia struggle with
https://images.app.goo.gl/mpxth1Ndk75eCHtj8 dysnomia or anomia
and SFA would be an
appropriate intervention. Also works well with clients who
have chronic non-fluent aphasia. Children in schools can also
benefit in order to help them understand concepts more
deeply.

Procedures and Protocol:

Step 1. Put a
Sample Goals target word (in
picture form) in
Short-Term Goal: Client will name 4 of the center of the
6 semantic features per target across 20 graphic organizer.
items in 3 consecutive sessions.
Step 2. Have the
Long-Term Goal: Client will client try to name
demonstrate a 10% or more the picture.
improvement from pre-treatment to
post-treatment on a standardized
naming assessment, the Boston Naming
Test (BNT), following 8 weeks of SFA
treatment.
 Regardless of the answer, move to step 3.

Step 3. Ask each of the 6 questions around the picture

-What type of thing is it?
-Where do you find it?
-What does it make you think of?
-What does it look like (taste like, feel like, etc)?
-What is it used for?
-What does it do?

Step 4. Have the client try to name the target again. If they
can’t say it, you say the word and have them repeat it.

Evidence Transference→ plasticity in response to

one training experience can enhance the
Class of Evidence: acquisition of similar behavior

Class 2. The studies included in our

assessment of semantic feature analysis
were: a systematic review, single-subject
design, single-subject experimental design,
and multiple baseline designs.
- Systematic Review of 11 Single Case
Studies (Maddy, Capilouto, & McComas,
2014)
- Single Subject Design (Lowell, Beeson &
Holland, 1995)
- Single Subject Experimental Design (Kiran
and Thompson, 2003)
- Multiple Baseline Design (Boyle, 2004;
Lowell, Beeson & Holland, 1995; Rider,
Wright, Marshall & Page, 2008)
Theoretical Model
SFA is based on the interactive model of
word retrieval.
This model introduced the notions that the
component processes involved in word
recognition proceed in parallel and not in serial;
that processing is cascaded, so that a later
process can begin to operate on the outputs of
earlier processes before the earlier processes
have themselves completed; and that bottom-
up and top-down processes continually interact
throughout processing (Squire, 2009).
Evidence-Based:

Typicality - Studies suggest SFA is effective at

The more similar a word is in a category
to the target word, the more typical it is.
Results from a study by Kiran and
Thompson (2003) suggest that choosing a
more difficult or atypical target word helps
the client generalize to naming of typical
items.
Principles of Neuroplasticity:
improving naming in nouns and verbs for
non-fluent aphasia (Boyle & Coehlo, 1995;
Kiran & Thompson, 2003)
- Generalized improvement in treated and
untreated nouns (Kiran & Thompson,
2003)
- There are some studies that show
improvement at the discourse level, while
 others have not had success. (Kiran & people with fluent aphasias (Boyle, 2004)
Thompson, 2003; Rider, Wright, Marshall,
& Page, 2008).
- A systematic review by Maddy, Capilouto,
and McComas in 2014 determined that
SFA is an effective tool for confrontational
naming for trained items in individuals
with non-degenerative aphasia. SFA had
some generalization to untreated items
and connected speech in some of the
studies.
- Improvement in confrontation naming of
treated nouns was generalized to
untreated nouns. There was also
improvement in some discourse
https://images.app.goo.gl/spTGSks7hASiZi6bA
associated with confrontation naming in

Annotated Bibliography
Boyle, M & Coelho, C.A. (1995). Application of semantic feature analysis as a treatment for aphasic dysnomia. American Journal
Speech Language Pathology, 4 (4), 94-98. Doi: 10.1044/1058-0360.0404.94
Boyle and Coelho applied the SFA treatment technique for dysnomia in an individual with Broca’s aphasia. The
researchers found that SFA was effective in confrontation naming and generalizing for untreated pictures, however,
generalization was not found regarding connected speech. A multiple-baseline approach was used to collect and analyze
the collected data. The researchers found that increased confrontation may be achieved through a semantic or a
phonological route, stating the effectiveness of SFA.
Boyle, M. (2004). Semantic feature analysis treatment for anomia in two fluent aphasia syndromes. American Journal of Speech-
Language Pathology, 13, 236-249.
Boyle used the SFA treatment approach on two individuals with fluent aphasia analyzing positive outcomes for the
different types of fluent aphasia, whether or not using more exemplars would assist with generalization, and if a more
direct measurement approach would discover generalization in discourse in word naming. The researcher conducted a
multiple baseline design. The results indicated that confrontation naming of treated nouns generalized to untreated nouns
and that there was an improvement in some aspects of discourse production associated with naming.
Kiran, S., & Thompson, C. (2003). The role of semantic complexity in treatment of naming deficits: Training semantic categories
in fluent aphasia by controlling exemplar typicality. Journal of Speech, Language, & Hearing, Research, 46, (773-787).
This article examined the effect of typicality of category examples on naming using a SSED across 4 participants and
behaviors with fluent aphasia. The participants received an SFA intervention to improve their naming of typical or atypical
things in semantic categories. Results indicated that patients trained on the naming of atypical examples showed
generalization to the naming of intermediate and typical items however patients trained on typical items showed no
generalized naming effect to intermediate or atypical items. Analysis of errors indicated an evolution of errors to primarily
semantic and phonemic paraphasias.
Lowell, S., Beeson, P., & Holland, A. (1995) Semantic cueing procedure on naming performance of adults with aphasia. American
Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 4, 109-114.
The purpose of this study was to determine if three people with aphasia, two with conduction and one with anomic, could
 be taught self-selected semantic cues to improve their naming performance with the use of SFA in a single-subject,
multiple-baseline design. The study was interested in the ability for these skills to generalize across untrained stimuli
these participants are exposed to in day to day life. Two out of three participants showed improved naming performance
on trained items, with evidence of generalization to untrained items and maintenance over a one-week period. For those
two subjects who improved, the results indicate that a semantic cueing strategy was learned and is accurate when
naming trained and untrained items.
Maddy, K.M., Capilouto, G.J., & McComas, K.L. (2014). The effectiveness of semantic feature analysis: An evidence-based
systematic review. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 57 (4), (254-267).
Maddy, Capilouto & McComas analyzed 11 previous studies in order to determine the
effectiveness of SFA to improve naming abilities for people with aphasia. The researchers found that previous research
was methodically sound and that SFA is an effective intervention for improving naming capabilities for most people with
aphasia. Further research is needed to determine generalization effects using SFA. The articles were analyzed in a
consistent manner and were described clearly.
Rider, J. D., Wright, H. H., Marshall, R. C., & Page, J. L. (2008). Using semantic feature analysis to improve contextual discourse in
adults with aphasia. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17(2), 161-172.
This article examined the benefits of utilizing SFA with 3 adults with chronic, non-fluent aphasia. SFA was used to try to
improve the retrieval of single words generated in closed-set contexts in order to improve the retrieval of the same words
in conversation. A multiple baseline design was used throughout this study. All three participants improved their naming
accuracy for trained items but did not generalize these skills to untrained words or discourse. All participants declined in
accuracy 1 month after treatment. Participants were able to produce more target words from the trained list on discourse
tasks.
Squire, L. (2009). Connectionist Models. In Encyclopedia of Neuroscience (Vol 3, pp.75-82)
This chapter covered the different connectionist models. It described the interactive activation model of word retrieval
and its processes. This model introduced the notions that the component processes involved in word recognition proceed
in parallel and not in serial.