Table 2.

Performance (accuracy) of people with aphasia on sentence comprehension tests.

	Sentence Picture Matching with Auditory Moving Window Presentation
	A	P	3NP	PRO	REF	CS	CO	SS	SO	SSPRO	SOPRO	SSREF	SOREF
PWA Mean	82.1	79.9	84.6	74.5*	86.3	83.4	74.3*	75.7	63.1*	75.2	63.7*	71.9	63.5*
PWA std	18.4	20.2	16.0	21.0	21.0	18.4	23.0	20.1	22.4	21.0	20.6	22.5	19.9
EC Mean	94.8	94.1	97.9	93.1	98.7	95.7	94.4	93.4	91	96.6	88.4	95.8	83.7
EC std	6.1	8.3	5.8	4.4	3.7	6.7	6.2	9.7	8.9	6.9	14.8	7.9	13.1
	Sentence Picture Matching with Full Sentence Presentation
	A	P	3NP	PRO	REF	CS	CO	SS	SO	SSPRO	SOPRO	SSREF	SOREF
PWA Mean	83.8	77.5*	81.7	74.5*	80.4	81.2	72.6*	70.0	66.5+	71.1	60.1*,+	69.3	61.0*,+
PWA std	15.3	18.4	17.3	21.9	23.8	18.6	20.4	17.8	14.8	19.8	20.5	20.5	17.7
EC Mean	95.1	93.6	97	96.3	97.2	95	92.6	92.1	82.3	95.1	82.4	94.2	83
EC std	3.6	6.5	5.5	5.7	4.8	4.5	6.6	8	13.4	6.1	14.1	8.9	12.7
	Object Manipulation
	A	P	3NP	PRO	REF	CS	CO	SS	SO	SSPRO	SOPRO	SSREF	SOREF
PWA Mean	88.1	77.6*	66.3	68.8	67.0	88.2	71.8*	56.2	33.5*	53.3	36.8*	60.4	37.1*
PWA std	16.9	27.0	35.6	32.9	39.9	18.3	28.8	41.5	37.8	42.6	33.3	39.5	37.7
EC Mean	100	99	97.2	97.4	95.4	100	98.8	99	84.2	91.8	83.4	96.4	87.9
EC std	0	6.7	14.9	13.4	17.8	0	6	2.7	21.2	25.6	24.2	15.1	22.9

Sentence type labels as in Table 1 * indicates a significant difference between the experimental sentence annotated and its baseline (e.g., PRO and 3NP in sentence picture matching with auditory moving window presentation.

⁺indicates a significant difference between SOPRO and SO and between SOREF and SO sentences.