th
th

One of the most important missions of the Eleanor M. Saffran Cognitive Neuroscience
Conference is to provide a forum for discussions that will bridge the gap between basic research in language and cognition and clinical practice. Accordingly, the audience has consistently included clinicians, researchers, educators and students in cognitive neuroscience and communication sciences. Students who attend this conference are key players in this translational process, as many will be the clinical practitioners and/or researchers of the future. Thus, we are committed to making this conference accessible to all students who wish to attend. The program was initiated by a grant from Doctors Jenny Saffran and Seth Pollak that helps to support this conference. This year, the program was additional supported by a grant from The National
Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. The program supports registration and lunch costs for students of all academic levels (undergrad through post-doc). This year we have awarded ten S affran Student Scholar Awards for students who are pursuing doctoral degrees or are in post-doctoral training.
We are very excited about this program and its potential to foster a new generation of clinicians and scientists who see no gap at all between research and the clinic.
The recipients for this year’s award are:
Mackenzie Fama
Jennifer Lundine
Irene Minkina
Eun Jin Paek
Teenu Sanjeevan
Julia Schuchard
Salima Suleman
Sarah Villiard
Samantha Wootan
Hyunsoo Yoo
The following pages include the essays they have submitted to receive this award.

Mackenzie Fama
Throughout my academic and professional experiences, I have been drawn to the study of language and cognition. As an undergraduate student in linguistics and philosophy, I explored the social impacts of dialect variation and learned that even minor variations in language use can influence an individual’s societal role. While pursuing a Master’s degree in speech-language pathology, I quickly became enthralled with the topic of neurorehabilitation, with a focus on aphasia. After working as a speech-language pathologist (SLP) for four years, I decided to return for a research degree and have just finished my first year in the
Interdisciplinary Program in Neuroscience at Georgetown University. I plan to complete my thesis research on language recovery after stroke. I am drawn to the promise of improving individuals’ quality of life by facilitating effective communication, but I recognize that rehabilitation of language function requires an appreciation of all other cognitive domains. It is for this reason that I hope to attend the 9 th
Annual Eleanor M. Saffran Conference, to learn more about the role of working memory in language rehabilitation.
Prior to entering my current program at Georgetown, I worked as an SLP at MedStar
National Rehabilitation Hospital in Washington, DC. This clinical position was an ideal professional setting, as I benefited from and contributed to my hospital’s dedication to continuing education and research. I collaborated with colleagues on a research project investigating the merits of group treatment as a social context for aphasia recovery. I presented the study at the 2012 Clinical Aphasiology Conference, where I was proud to receive positive feedback about our innovative research. Through this experience, however, I also began to appreciate the significant limitations of approaching aphasia recovery solely from the viewpoint of a clinical speech-language pathologist. I frequently became frustrated by the inconsistent success I found in using traditional therapy approaches with my patients and sought the opportunity to delve further into the neural bases behind these individuals’ recovery.
Additionally, I often saw patients with seemingly similar language abilities who performed very differently both on structured assessments and in functional contexts, so I became interested in the impact of overall cognitive functioning on language performance.
Determined to better understand how to maximize patients’ recovery, I turned to neuroscience, a field in which there is a growing body of literature regarding the applicability of neuroplasticity principles in aphasia. I recognize that there is vast room for improvement of current rehabilitation practices and, by pursuing a Ph.D. in neuroscience, I aim to help identify those potential advances and bring them to clinical practice. During my rotations as a first year student, I have participated in multiple research projects on aphasia, including: a survey-based exploration of inner speech and a clinical trial of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with Dr. Peter Turkeltaub, an investigation of statistical language learning with Dr. Elissa
Newport, and an eye-tracking study on phonological alexia with Dr. Rhonda Friedman.
For my own thesis research, I am interested in using imaging to study the neural mechanisms that underlie the effectiveness of standard aphasia therapy protocols and I am eager to learn more about the potential benefit of combining these treatments with newer behavioral approaches as well as pharmacological intervention and/or brain stimulation. During this past year’s coursework, I have gained a more thorough understanding of the cognitive neuroscience

underlying working memory and the functional overlap between memory and language systems in the brain. I now hope to incorporate this interaction into my own research, with a new appreciation for the potential impacts of working memory deficits on word retrieval, repetition, and auditory comprehension in individuals with aphasia.
The translational power of such research may continue to be limited, however, by a lack of communication between scientists and clinicians, so my ultimate goal is to establish a career as an academic clinician-scientist dedicated to bridging this gap. My neuroscience education will be essential in providing the scientific knowledge I need for understanding the neural mechanisms of rehabilitation and, coupled with my strong clinical background and continued pursuit of a clinical education, will prepare me to become a leader in the interdisciplinary field of aphasia recovery. I plan to continue working directly with patients throughout my career, so I greatly value opportunities for continuing education with direct clinical applicability, such as the
Eleanor M. Saffran Conference. My clinical background and recent coursework place me in a unique position to appreciate this year’s conference topic. I am particularly enthusiastic about the addition of the second day’s translational workshop, which will help me identify realistic ways to incorporate research findings into clinical practice. I am certain that this experience will serve as a key milestone on my path toward a career in clinical research.

Jennifer Lundine
I am pleased to submit this application for the Saffran Student Scholar
Award to this year’s Eleanor M. Saffran Cognitive Neuroscience
Conference. My long-term research focus relies heavily on the link between working memory and language processes, which makes this conference an exciting opportunity for me and highly applicable to my future research and clinical career goals. For more than a decade, I have worked as a speechlanguage pathologist on a pediatric rehabilitation unit at a large children’s hospital. I returned to school to pursue my doctorate in 2012, because I wanted to work to help address some of the unanswered questions that arose in my everyday clinical practice. As a result, my academic and research programming focus on the cognitive-linguistic impairments experienced by children and adolescents following acquired brain injury. I am particularly interested in advancing our clinical practice to promote better academic and social success for these individuals through more efficacious assessment and intervention practices.
Topics presented at this conference would apply directly to my proposed dissertation research. In this project, I plan to examine expository, or informational, discourse abilities in adolescents following TBI and orthopedically injured, typically developing controls. Complex linguistic behaviors, like discourse, are highly dependent on many other cognitive systems requiring executive control, such as speed of processing, working memory and attention (Coelho,
2007; Ewing-Cobbs & Barnes, 2002). Examining adolescents’ ability to summarize expository discourse should prove useful because exposition is considered the “language of the curriculum” and it places increased demands on the very skills most commonly affected by pediatric TBI: attention, working memory and other executive functions (Horton, Soper, & Reynolds, 2010).
Further, the performance of children with brain injury on neuropsychological measures that tap working memory, organization, and problem solving have frequently been found to be predictive of discourse performance (e.g., Chapman, 2006; Hay & Moran, 2005; Turkstra & Holland, 1998;
Walz, Yeates, Taylor, Stancin, & Wade, 2012).
Currently, very little is known about how adolescents with TBI are able to transform informational language to create an appropriate summary, despite the importance of this task to academic performance. Specifically, the goal of my research is to analyze the abilities of adolescents with TBI to verbally summarize different types of expository discourse passages and examine these findings in relation to executive functions, language abilities and school performance. Findings will expand our understanding of how adolescents summarize informational language following TBI compared to children without injury. Further, we will have additional evidence as to whether these deficits appear most closely related to language or executive functions. Lastly, we will have a greater understanding of the relationship between expository discourse skills and academic performance. These outcomes are expected to have an important positive impact because in order to help students with TBI succeed in the classroom, we must understand where and why breakdown occurs as they process lectures or text-based information.
Aside from my personal and long-term research interests, this year’s Cognitive
Neuroscience Conference is pertinent to an ongoing project within the Aphasia Laboratory at
The Ohio State University, where I am working as a research assistant with Dr. Stacy Harnish.
Dr. Harnish and I are currently writing a paper from data recently presented at the Clinical
Aphasiology Conference. This study examined a measure of nonverbal working memory as a

predictor of anomia treatment success. It has been well established that individuals with aphasia tend to have difficulty with nonverbal working memory (Mayer & Murray, 2012; Wright &
Fergadiotis, 2012) that can influence linguistic and nonlinguistic processing. The extent to which these working memory deficits impact recovery from aphasia is still under investigation. From a clinical standpoint, the relationship between nonverbal working memory and response to aphasia treatment may hold prognostic value in predicting those individuals who will respond best to a particular type of treatment. This may also help to identify which individuals might first benefit from working-memory training in hopes of improving later lexical learning and retrieval.
As a practicing clinician and doctoral student, I have not come across a two-day conference that is so fully applicable to my clinical and research interests as this year’s Eleanor
M. Saffran Cognitive Neuroscience Conference. I would be an enthusiastic participant, and could return home with new theoretical foundations to support my research with both children and adults who experience working memory and language impairments. Moreover, the additional focus on translating theory into evidence based treatments is immediately applicable to both my research and clinical work. Because working memory and other cognitive functions are so closely tied to language processes, and these areas are often affected by injury to the developing brain, gaining a deeper understanding of this framework is critical for my future research focusing on children and adolescents with brain injury. Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Irene Minkina
I came to my doctoral institution, University of Washington, with a strong interest in the interface between language and other cognitive processes. More specifically, I was interested in how cognitive processes such as short-term memory and attention supported language processes, and the breakdown of these cognitive processes in individuals with aphasia.
My four years at the University of Washington have helped me develop my understanding of the variety of extant research in this area as well as to determine the area that would be the focus of my dissertation research. I am currently in my fourth year of my doctoral program in Speech and
Hearing Sciences under the mentorship of Diane Kendall. After completing my general exams in my third year of the program, which focused largely on the nature of short-term memory and attentional mechanisms in individuals with aphasia, I determined that I wanted to explore the relationship between short-term memory and language breakdown in individuals with aphasia.
I am interested in investigating how the fine-grained process of short-term memory facilitates access to linguistic representations, and the way in which this process breaks down and recovers in individuals with aphasia. I recently successfully defended my dissertation proposal, in which I proposed a study looking at the relationship between types of word retrieval errors (semantic versus phonologic) and the location of errors made (recency/primacy effects) on a word pair repetition task. The planned work closely follows the work of Dr. Nadine Martin and colleagues that explores the nature of short-term memory breakdown in individuals with aphasia.
Though the nature of the proposed work is theoretical, my motivation for this research is a clinical one. If, as a field, we can better understand the way in which short-term memory supports access to linguistic knowledge, we can use the information gained from these investigations to create more sensitive and specific assessments and treatments for individuals with aphasia. I am currently writing an NIH NIDCD F31 application to fund this work. Dr.
Martin is co-sponsoring my application and is a member of my dissertation committee.
I believe attending the Saffran Cognitive Neuroscience Conference through a Saffran
Student Scholar Travel Award would be very valuable to me at this point in my graduate study.
Attending the this Conference will expose me to the most current and noteworthy research in working memory, a field of study strongly related to my current work. Additionally it will allow me to directly interact with researchers in the field. Because this conference is both theoretical and clinical in nature, it is directly related to my goals of understanding verbal short-term memory on a theoretical level and using this knowledge to develop sensitive and specific tools for the assessment and treatment of aphasia. The addition of the Translational Workshop is particularly exciting, as it will allow me to see how theoretical research has led to the development of clinical tools. Additionally, the opportunity to meet with Dr. Judith Cooper will be invaluable to me, especially as I am currently working on a predoctoral fellowship application

to NIDCD, and the opportunity to attend the pre-conference dinner with the speakers will allow me to ask specific questions and connect with some of the top researchers in the field. I am especially looking forward to meeting with Dr. David Caplan, Dr. Laura Murray, and Dr. Jason
Chein. I believe their talks will help me gain understanding of both the theoretical and clinical advances in the fields of working memory and aphasia. For these reasons, I would be honored to attend the Eleanor M. Saffran Cognitive Neuroscience Conference as a student fellow.

Eun Jin Paekh
As a doctoral student just finished with the third year of my program, my area of interest has become focused on developing and examining the effects of cognitive-linguistic treatments for individuals with acquired neurogenic communication disorders.
Cognitive and linguistic difficulties due to dementing diseases or following strokes are the most thought provoking for me as they are not an innate impairment but an acquired deficit.
Individuals with aphasia or dementia cannot help suffering from those cognitive and linguistic problems as well as related frustrations, all of which negatively impact their quality of life.
Working with individuals with adult neurogenic language disorders for several years as a speech language pathologist, I felt empathy for their pains and have had a strong internal desire to develop treatment methods to alleviate their cognitive and linguistic symptoms. In particular, the intertwined relationship between language and cognitive abilities, such as working memory, led me on a journey toward finding efficacious treatment protocols for language and cognition and a theoretical basis for such evidence-based practice.
With this impetus, both my first and second years of doctoral study have primarily been devoted to developing language treatment protocols that concomitantly tap working memory processes. The rationale for this treatment approach was that deficits in working memory are common in individuals with acquired neurogenic disorders and may underlie certain acquired language problems, as argued by many researchers (e.g., Murray, 2012). However, only limited research has thus far demonstrated that individuals with acquired neurogenic language disorders respond to working memory treatment.
Accordingly, for my first year research project, I worked on developing a treatment protocol for an individual with chronic anomic aphasia to examine the short- and long-term effect of direct remediation of working memory on language symptoms. To develop training tasks, I adapted both complex and simple working memory tasks such as N-back, updating, reconstitution of words from oral spelling, and sentence span tasks from previous research to maximize generalization of the treatment effect. Through pre- and post-treatment assessments, I also examined whether psycholinguistic assessments including verbal short-term memory tasks such as TALSA , and discourse samples were sensitive to changes associated with working memory training. The results and implications of this work have been presented in a poster session at Clinical Aphasiology Conference 2014, which was held in St. Simons Island, Georgia.
For my second year research project, I continued to utilize this working memory approach to intervention of individuals with developmental reading and writing disorders on the ground that working memory underpins the processes of reading and writing. I conducted this research employing a single subject design across participants with two adolescents with similar reading and writing difficulties. An intriguing point of this project was the participants’ characteristics:
They showed very distinct cognitive profiles with one participant demonstrating good working memory and attention skills, and the other participant showing poor working memory with great social skills. For their treatment, both participants were provided with the same type of working memory training tasks targeting reading and writing and with stimuli individually tailored for each participant. The probe results were interesting demonstrating different patterns of

improvements on measures of working memory and language. Also we found generalization of this treatment effect to a standardized phonological processing assessment. This study is still in progress because one more adult participant with developmental dyslexia recently participated in the project. I am excited to compare results across participants, as this third participant exhibits severe deficits in divided attention without other memory (e.g., phonological store) problems.
Although I have had valuable experiences and obtained many insights through this line of research regarding working memory treatments, there are still many questions to be answered and discussed to improve and extend the scope of my previous and current research projects. I would like to learn more about the theoretical basis of working memory and language from various interdisciplinary perspectives. For example, it is still unclear to me whether verbal working memory is the driving force for and underpins language processing, or whether there is another entity such as individual language competence or a domain general executive function, which in turn operates and enables both verbal working memory and language performance.
More Importantly, I am currently formulating my dissertation prospectus regarding working memory treatment in a patient population with neurogenic language disorders. I am interested in neurophysiological changes following a word retrieval therapy. Specifically, I am interested in comparing a combined word retrieval and working memory treatment versus a traditional naming therapy in individuals with dementia or aphasia. I am hoping that this project will help contribute to theoretical perspectives as well evidence-based practice for clinicians working with these clinical populations.
As stated earlier, my research interests and achievements fit very well with the focus of the
Eleanor M. Saffran Conference . The theoretical and empirical foundations and clinical applications that will be discussed at the conference will definitely be of great value to me. In particular, discussions on both children and adults are germane to my current and future research and will help positively influence my academic career with cutting-edge interdisciplinary perspectives. Also I believe I can contribute as a student to the translational workshop with my experiences from my prior two research projects. If there is an opportunity, I will be happy to share with other investigators and students about what I have learned from those experiments and participants. Since neither the department nor the lab has available funding to support my travel and accommodation costs to Philadelphia, the Student Scholar Travel Award will be a great stepping-stone for me toward my future academic career.

Teenu Sanjeevan
Upon entry to kindergarten, approximately 7% of children will be diagnosed with specific language impairment (SLI) (Tomblin et al., 1997), a disorder in which children exhibit deficits in language development. At present, the cause of SLI is unknown and this has significantly reduced our ability to identify children at risk of SLI. Evidence shows that those children whose language impairment persists into adulthood are likely to exhibit impaired social behaviour, emotional instability and in some cases, psychiatric disorders (Clegg et al., 2005).
Current research investigating the cause of SLI has us asking a fundamental question concerning the nature of the disorder: whether the underlying mechanisms of SLI are specific to language or non-specific, where mechanisms are involved with multiple areas of cognitive development. My research will answer this question by examining individual differences in language abilities and the extent to which these differences are explained by general learning mechanisms using comparisons between children with typical language development (TD) and children with specific language impairment (SLI).
SLI is a language disorder characterized by deficits in language development that cannot be explained by neurological damage, social/emotional disorders, hearing loss or frank oral motor dysfunction (Leonard, 1998, 2014). The language deficits observed in SLI are primarily associated with grammar. Specifically, individuals with SLI show poor comprehension and application of inflectional verb morphology (Gopnik & Crago, 1991; Rice & Wexler, 1996; Rice,
2003) and complex sentence structures such as those consisting of long-distance dependencies and relative clauses (Riches, Loucas, Baird, Charman & Simonoff, 2010). Although many children with SLI do not present with speech-sound disorders (Shriberg, Tomblin & McSweeny,
1999), they do exhibit difficulties with processing phonological information (Botting & Conti-
Ramsden, 2001; Gathercole, 2006). Currently, there is no consensus on a theory that explains the language deficits observed in SLI.
In the past couple of decades, researchers have explored a number of hypotheses that attempt to explain the impairment observed in SLI. Two of the prominent domain-general theories include deficits in working memory (see review Montgomery et al., 2010) and, deficits in procedural memory (see review Lum, Conti-Ramsden, Morgan & Ullman, 2014; Ullman &
Pierpont, 2005). Theories of working memory have suggested that phonological short-term memory and the central executive, components of working memory that are involved with language processing, are implicated in in SLI (Gathercole & Baddeley, 1990; Lum, Conti-
Ramsden, Page & Ullman, 2012). Theories proposing procedural deficits, referred to as the
Procedural Deficit Hypothesis , suggest that impairment in the neural mechanisms that support procedural memory explain the language deficits observed in SLI (Ullman & Pierpont, 2005;
Hedenius et al., 2011; Hsu & Bishop, 2014).
Although research suggests that working memory and procedural memory are distinguishable memory systems (Baddeley, 2003), review of the literature reveals considerable

overlap across the aspects of language learning supported by working memory and procedural memory. For instance, children with SLI show marked deficits in their ability to repeat nonwords
(see review Graf Estes et al., 2007). To explain these difficulties, working memory studies have suggested impairment of phonological short-term memory, a capacity-limited storage system argued to maintain sequence-based language input (Baddeley, 2004). On the other hand, Ullman
(2004) has argued that deficits in procedural memory, a system involved with sequence-specific learning across sensorimotor and cognitive skills, would compromise the ability to sequentially organize phonemes and thus affect the ability to repeat novel phonological information including nonwords. Considering the morphological and syntactic difficulties, Montgomery et al.’s (2010) review of the working memory literature suggests that phonological short-term memory may facilitate the development of a child’s morphological and syntactic frameworks specifically through analysis of the structural and categorical regularities across utterances. Interestingly, a similar argument has been proposed by Ullman (2001; 2004), suggesting that repeated exposure to speech input provides children with the opportunity to learn the specific sequence of rules and conditions needed to produce morphologically and syntactically grammatical sentences.
As a 2 nd
year PhD student in the Department of Speech-Language Pathology, the aim of my doctoral research is to establish whether limitations in one or both of these memory systems contribute to the language impairment observed in SLI or whether they exist as co-morbid deficits in SLI. In the process of developing my studies, however, I realize that the correspondence between the roles that working memory and procedural memory play in language development poses a methodological challenge for my research. Specifically, it suggests that these two memory systems are not methodologically separable.
In addition to further reviewing the working memory literature, my efforts to address this matter will also include attending the 9 th
Annual Eleanor M. Saffran Conference on Cognitive
Neuroscience and Rehabilitation of Communication Disorders. Here, the talks that will be presented by Drs. Banich, Caplan and Montgomery are of specific interest to me for the purposes of advancing my knowledge on the theories of working memory and the implications of those theories for understanding language development and language disorders. Given the specificity of my research, however, the opportunity to interact with these conference speakers directly would enable me to discuss and receive constructive feedback on my methodological approach to distinguishing the roles of working memory and procedural memory in language development.
Their expert advice will help ensure that my research design answers my specific research questions.
The long-term objective of my research is to identify a diagnostic marker of SLI. By doing so, we can identify children at risk of this disorder earlier, deliver appropriate therapies to target their specific language difficulties and thereby improve their expressive language ability and overall quality of life. To get to this point, however, we first need to understand the cognitive mechanisms that underlie SLI and jointly evaluate their involvement in language development.
My doctoral research will play a significant role in this endeavour.

Julia Schuchard
The 9 th
Annual Eleanor M. Saffran Cognitive
Neuroscience Conference will promote valuable discussion of the relationship between memory systems and language processing, which is highly relevant to my current studies as well as my longterm career goals. My interest in cognitive neuroscience developed while I was earning my bachelor’s degree in psychology. As an undergraduate, I dissected a sheep’s brain in a neuroscience course, received pictures of my own brain after volunteering as a subject in an fMRI study, and worked as a research assistant in cognitive psychology and clinical neuroscience laboratories. Yet the experiences that most motivated me to pursue a research career were my interactions with individuals who had suffered a devastating loss of communication abilities. After working as an undergraduate research assistant in Dr. Rebecca Shisler-Marshall’s aphasia laboratory, I was excited to enter the Communication Sciences and Disorders Ph.D. program at Northwestern
University.
As a doctoral student, I have developed a line of research focused on learning and memory in aphasia, with the long-term aim of advancing the rehabilitation of language in this clinical population. I continue to interact with individuals with aphasia both within and outside a laboratory setting. For two years I moderated a support group for individuals with aphasia and their caregivers, discussing the frustrations that they face and the ways in which they cope with the consequences of aphasia. Under the direction of my advisor Dr. Cynthia Thompson, I have also gained experience in behavioral and neuroimaging research methods.
The topic of working memory and its implications for language processing is very pertinent to my current research. My dissertation examines implicit and explicit learning and memory in individuals with aphasia and neurologically intact adults. This project tests statistical learning abilities using an artificial grammar learning task and assesses individuals’ working memory, procedural memory, and recognition and recall memory. The results of my studies suggest that implicit learning remains intact in people with agrammatic aphasia, but there is also individual variability in learning abilities in this population. These individual differences may be related to working memory capacity and other executive function skills. Elucidating the relationships between learning processes, memory systems, and language processing will have important clinical applications for patients with brain injury who have deficits in these areas.
Thus, I would benefit from learning more about theories of working memory from the experts in the field who will be speaking at the Eleanor M. Saffran Conference.
Furthermore, the primary aim of my research goals is to apply knowledge of language and other cognitive processes to the rehabilitation of language in people with aphasia. This conference will provide information about and discussion of this type of translational research.
The growing interest in brain training has produced a number of therapeutic interventions and commercially available products that claim to enhance individuals’ working memory, as well as other cognitive skills. Evidence of increased memory capacity as a result of training activities is promising for patients who struggle with tasks that place high demands on working memory. Yet the underlying mechanisms of cognitive training are not well understood, and there remain questions regarding the efficacy of working memory training and generalization to activities of daily living. I would be very interested to learn about the current state of knowledge regarding

working memory training and how it can most effectively be implemented for patients with language disorders.
The Eleanor M. Saffran Conference will not only provide information about these important topics, but will also call attention to empirical questions regarding memory and language that have not yet been addressed. Thus, the sessions at this conference may motivate productive directions for my future research. As I complete my dissertation, I am continuing to develop new studies and work towards my career goals of conducting research that contributes to our knowledge of the neurocognitive mechanisms of learning and memory and how to exploit these mechanisms to promote language recovery. Participating in the Eleanor M. Saffran
Cognitive Neuroscience Conference would be valuable in helping me achieve these goals.

Salima Suleman
I am a third year PhD Candidate at the University of Alberta and
I would appreciate being considered for the Saffran Student Scholar
Travel Award Program for the 9th Annual Eleanor M. Saffran
Conference on Cognitive Neuroscience and Rehabilitation of
Communication Disorders: Advances in Working Memory and Working
Memory Training: Implications for Language Processing and
Rehabilitation I am a registered speech-language pathologist and I am currently developing a proposal for my doctoral dissertation project on the topic of rational decision-making in people with aphasia (PWA). In this brief essay I will describe my doctoral research project and the relevance of the topics that will be presented at the Eleanor M. Saffran Conference to my current and future research projects.
The objective of my doctoral research program is to conduct a preliminary investigation into decision-making in PWA. Rational decision-making involves the integration of multiple cognitive functions, including attention (sustaining and switching focus to important information), working memory (WM; conscious storage and manipulation of information), executive functions (problem solving, inhibition of impulsive responses to allow for a logical exploration of options), and language (encoding of ideas; Evans, 2010; Murray & Clark, 2006).
Recent research has shown that PWA may have deficits in these cognitive areas thus it is possible that decision-making may be more challenging for PWA (Hula & McNeil, 2008; Martin
& Allen, 2008; Murray, 2012; Purdy, 2002; Wright & Fergadiotis, 2012).
My dissertation project is designed to explore two major areas related to decision-making in PWA: (1) to identify and determine the extent of any measurable differences between PWA and controls on a non-linguistic decision-making task; and, (2) to determine the cognitive predictors of performance on a non-linguistic decision-making task in PWA and controls. The non-linguistic decision-making task I will be using in this study is called the Iowa Gambling
Task (IGT). The IGT is risk-taking card game in which participants select from four decks of cards to maximize their overall gain (Bechara, Damasio & Damasio, 1994). The IGT has been used extensively as a proxy for real-life decision-making and was specifically selected for this study because the language demands of the task are minimal, making it appropriate for PWA
(Bechara et al., 1994; Toplak, Sorge, Benoit, West, & Staonvich, 2010). Using eye-tracking technology I will be able to collect multiple dependent measures while people with and without aphasia complete the IGT. For example, the eye-tracker allows me to collect information on an individual’s pupil size, which has been shown to accurately reflect the level of mental effort or intensity that an individual is exerting during a task (i.e., increased cognitive effort results in increased pupil size; Beatty, 1982). As I am using eye-tracking technology, I will also be able to determine the number of times an individual considers advantageous and disadvantageous decks before they make a decision (i.e., the learning process). Finally, this research study will use inferential statistics to determine whether performance on measures of WM, attention, executive function, and language predict cognitive effort exerted during the IGT and/or learning throughout the IGT in people with and without aphasia (Toplak et al., 2010). SULEMAN,
Salima Application to Saffran Student Scholar Travel Award Program 2014

The topics that will be presented at the Eleanor M. Saffran Conference are extremely relevant to my dissertation project as well as my future research endeavours. As mentioned above, I will examine the relationship between WM and rational decision-making in my dissertation research. Because an individual is only aware of the finite amount of information being held and processed in WM, the conscious decision-making process is theoretically related to an individual’s ability to store and manipulate information in WM (Evans, 2008). Therefore, understanding WM and new developments in working memory research will be critical for my research program. In particular, the sessions entitled “Advances in Theories of Working Memory and Executive Function” by Dr. Banich and “Implications of Theories of Working Memory for
Understanding Language” by Dr. Caplan) will potentially inform my research methodology
The timing of the Eleanor M. Saffran conference occurs at an ideal time during my doctoral program. In March 2014 I successfully passed my oral and written candidacy exam.
During summer 2014 I will be carrying out a feasibility study using a WM picture span task to determine whether the pupils of PWA dilate with increasing cognitive effort. During the summer months I will also be developing my research project proposal. My supervisory committee will convene in early October 2014 to discuss and approve the project proposal. Therefore, by attending the Eleanor M. Saffran conference in early September I will have the unique opportunity to incorporate recent advances in WM and language research into my research proposal and ultimately my research project.
Finally, the 2014 Eleanor M. Saffran Conference includes sessions on intervention and treatment to improve WM (i.e., “Advances and Controversies on WM Interventions” by Dr. Chein,
“Working Memory Training for Adults with Aphasia” by Dr. Murray, “Interventions for
Working Memory Disorders in Adults” by Dr. Murray, and “Adult Language Working Memory
Treatment” by Dr. Murray). These sessions are directly relevant to my future research endeavours. The results from my study may indicate that performance on decision-making tasks may be related to performance on WM tasks. Thus it may follow that intervention to improve decision-making may incorporate some WM treatment. The information I learn in the WM intervention sessions may be incorporated into future studies related to the rehabilitation of DM in PWA. Therefore, it would be very beneficial for me to understand WM treatments that have been effective in treating adults (with and without aphasia).
I would be honoured and excited to attend this conference that is so interesting and highly related to the research project I am currently developing. Thank you for considering me for the
Saffran Student Scholar Travel Award Program.

Sarah Villard
I was extremely excited to learn that the topic of this year’s
Eleanor M. Saffran Cognitive Neuroscience Conference and
Translational Workshop will be working memory and working memory training in language rehabilitation, as I have a keen interest in the cognitive abilities that support both language processing and the language rehabilitation process. I have been working for the past year and a half on a study on non-linguistic attention in aphasia together with my mentor, Dr. Swathi Kiran, and have had the opportunity to present portions of my results thus far at both the Academy of Aphasia and the Clinical Aphasiology Conference. This coming academic year, I will be collecting data for my dissertation project, which will delve more deeply into the topic of attention in aphasia in both linguistic and non-linguistic contexts, as well as how a given individual’s attentional resources may vary from moment to moment and from day to day. I believe that investigating cognitive skills in individuals with language impairments is a critical line of inquiry, and that these skills may even play a central role in language rehabilitation. Gaining a fuller understanding of cognition in aphasia has the potential to shed light on aspects of the rehabilitative process that are not yet fully understood, such as why different patients respond differently to language therapy. Even after I complete my dissertation, this general area of inquiry is one that I plan to continue to pursue.
Working memory is a particularly interesting cognitive skill to me because it can be difficult to fully separate this skill from attention when evaluating a patient or designing an experimental task. Attending a conference that looks closely at the construct of working memory would help me to better understand the finer distinctions between working memory and attention
– as well as where they might functionally overlap with each other – which in turn would better enable me to incorporate this knowledge into the work I am currently doing. A number of the talks at the conference are highly relevant to my ongoing project. For example, the second talk, on connections between working memory and language, is compelling to me because understanding the ways in which language and cognition are connected is a major focus of my ongoing dissertation project. The talks on working memory and language therapy, too, are exciting to me because improving therapy options is the ultimate goal in any research on communication disorders. I am particularly excited to have the chance to hear Laura Murray speak, as I often cite her work on attention in aphasia.
Although I have not yet had the opportunity to attend the Cognitive Neuroscience
Conference, I understand that one of its goals is to help bridge the gap between clinical work and research. As a fourth-year student in the combined MS/PhD program in Speech-Language
Pathology at Boston University, I have been focused since the beginning of my training on becoming both a skillful clinician and an excellent researcher, and I am always looking for opportunities to participate in the integration of research and clinical work. I believe it is of the

utmost importance to ensure that the research we do in this field is based on real clinical questions, that the findings from the research are applied to clinical work, and that professionals from both groups are communicating with each other as much as possible. I would greatly appreciate the opportunity to attend a conference that places a high priority on fostering dialogue between clinicians and researchers, and which also includes a translational workshop that is focused on the application of research to clinical work.
I have learned that attending conferences and talking with as many people as possible – conference speakers, professors at different universities, clinicians, and other graduate students – is an invaluable experience for me as a doctoral student. The conversations I have had and connections I have made at previous conferences that I have attended have not only helped me to understand the work that others are doing, they have also given me new ideas for my own work, as well as ideas for future collaboration with others. I believe the Scholar Travel Award would greatly enhance my experience at the Cognitive Neuroscience Conference by giving me even more opportunities to talk one-on-one and in small groups with other students and professionals in my field. I had the opportunity several months ago to attend the Clinical Aphasiology
Conference on an NIDCD student fellowship and found that this was a highly beneficial experience for me. The extra opportunities provided by the fellowship gave me a number of opportunities to connect with other researchers and students, as well as helped me to gain confidence in networking and reaching out to others whose work I am interested in. I am certain
I would benefit greatly from attending this upcoming conference through the Scholar Travel
Award program. The extra opportunities that the program would offer, including having the chance to meet and speak with Dr. Judith Cooper, as well as attending the pre-conference dinner with the conference speakers, would greatly enhance my experience at the conference and would be greatly beneficial to me as I pursue my research career goals. Thank you for your consideration.

Samantha Wootan
When I contemplate the complexity and plasticity of the human brain, I am amazed at what we know and what we still have left to learn. This complexity is well demonstrated within the field of patient research. I find it fascinating that research on patients with brain damage has revealed how an injury or disease can leave certain processes impaired, while others remain intact. It is even more intriguing how working memory training interventions can aid the rehabilitation process.
Throughout the course of my research career, I look forward to contributing to this field of science in a way that will help us to better understand how working memory training can be a useful tool in the rehabilitation of patients.
My first experience in the field of working memory research began when I was an undergraduate at the University of North Florida, with Dr. Tracy Alloway. Together, we worked on data analysis and preparation of two manuscripts, which have since been published. The first project investigated working memory and sustained attention in dyslexic adults. We found that longer stimulus presentation times appeared to have eradicated a stimulus recognition automaticity deficit associated with dyslexia that was suggested by prior research. Additionally, we collaborated on a project investigating socioeconomic status (SES) and its influence on cognitive skills and academic success in children. We found that children from low SES environments exhibited reduced scores in episodic memory, phonological awareness and nonverbal IQ. Interestingly, working memory capacity was the best predictor for later academic achievement. In our many discussions, Dr. Alloway and I discussed several of her working memory training studies, and I was fascinated to learn that these interventions can lead to transfer to many other cognitive processes.
I am now in my second year of Northwestern University’s Brain, Behavior and Cognition program in the laboratory of Dr. Paul Reber. Following my arrival at Northwestern, I began work on several different projects investigating the plasticity of memory and the transfer effects of working memory training. One of my first projects was the compilation of an assessment battery that is comprehensive enough to detect a wide range of transfer effects, yet is resistant to practice effects. Pilot data on the assessment battery indicate that our measures of executive function are resistant to practice effects. In addition, I have been working in collaboration with Dr. Dan
Mroczek of the medical social sciences programs at NU on a meta-analysis of working memory training studies. We have been focusing on far transfer effects in studies on young, healthy adults, and found that working memory training produces reliable transfer effects to fluid intelligence measures in this population. That manuscript is in preparation and will be submitted for publication. It will also be the topic of my master’s thesis, which I will defend this summer.
Most recently I have been collaborating with Dr. Jordan Grafman, Director of Brain Injury
Research at the Rehab Institute Chicago (RIC) to investigate implicit memory in stroke and TBI patients. Data collection is just beginning, and I look forward to the opportunity to do patient research. Following the completion of that experiment, we will be implementing a working memory training study on stroke and TBI patients. In addition, my advisor and I also have

upcoming working memory training studies at RIC, Northwestern’s Cognitive Neurology and
Alzheimer’s Disease Center, and Northwestern’s Movement Disorders Center involving patients with aphasia, mild cognitive impairment, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson’s disease.
In the future, I hope to continue to investigate how working memory training can be a tool in the rehabilitation process for patients. It is my intention to use what we already know and continue to grow by learning more about the brain’s fascinating plasticity. I intend to communicate my findings through academic journals, presentations and the popular media, so that many can benefit from the advancements of science. A Saffran Student Travel Award would provide me with a wonderful opportunity to attend the Cognitive Neuroscience Conference at
Temple University and learn as much as I can over the two days. The knowledge that will be gained from a conference that is focused on working memory training interventions would be a priceless tool to move forward in my research.

Hyunsoo Yoo
Cognitive processes related to memory, such as working memory
(WM) and short-term memory (STM), have intrigued me since I worked with patients with brain injuries as a speech language pathologist at a rehabilitation hospital in South Korea. My impression of persons with aphasia
(PWA) was “good cognition, better recovery.” That was just an impression, however, and small clinical trials at the clinic were not enough to demonstrate its validity or generalizability. After forming this impression, I could not stop thinking about the relationship between language processing and cognitive factors in PWA. My endless curiosity led me to pursue a doctoral degree.
There are several specific reasons I have to attend the Cognitive Neuroscience of
Language conference. First, this conference (“Advances in Working Memory and Working
Memory Training: Implications for Language Processing and Rehabilitation.”) will provide cutting-edge information that relates to my research interests. One of my research interests is aphasia treatment. Specifically, I focus on the recovery factors in aphasia treatment and their relationships with cognitive functions such as working memory, short-term memory, and processing speed. I would like to continue to examine whether providing direct treatment in cognitive functions such as STM and WM would be effective as well as whether there is a hierarchy in how to approach cognitive function training (e.g., WM first or processing speed first).
My dissertation addresses the fundamental level of processing speed in PWA. This project is based on the concept of general slowing and processing-speed theories. Processing speed has an important role in activating memory functions to complete information processing within a specific time frame. If PWA have slowed processing for language-specific information or general slowing the slowness would cause additive processing difficulties for complex levels of cognitive processing that require WM or STM. Therefore, my project will examine whether
PWA are slow and if so, whether this slowing is related to the presence of aphasia and whether the slowing is different between linguistic and nonlinguistic domains. As such, this conference will be very important in helping me think through important issues in working memory and my specific interests—processing speed and general cognitive deficits in PWA.
In addition, attending this conference is important for my future career path as an independent aphasia researcher. One of my future projects will directly involve aphasia treatment of cognitive functions. Attending this conference will be critical for me to develop this project effectively. The future direction of aphasia treatment study will be about generalization effects.
More specifically, the ultimate goal of treatment in PWA is generalization. Thus, it is important to investigate whether direct treatment on cognitive functions will enhance generalization effects.
In addition, testing working memory training with and without language targets will also be one aspect of my future treatment study. Getting an informed update on related recent studies at the conference will be a great way for me to start preparing for my future projects.
Finally, I am currently working on my dissertation and plan to graduate next year.
Connecting with researchers now will be extremely helpful in developing a professional network to support my postdoctoral career. My current plan is to get a postdoctoral position to strengthen my research career, and my ultimate goal is to work in an academic setting as an independent

researcher focusing on the role of cognitive functions in language rehabilitation in PWA. As a researcher, a very important goal is to spearhead clinically beneficial research grounded in sound theoretical approaches. Therefore, my movement between clinical impressions, theoretical foundations and empirical evidence will continue throughout my research career.
Attending the conference would provide an opportunity to meet experts who currently work in the field. Considering the topic of this year’s conference, my attendance will have profound professional benefits. I am also sure that this award will allow me to defray my travel and registration expenses so that I can attend this compelling conference. I appreciate your consideration of my application, as I know that attending this conference will help me achieve my professional goals.