Introduction: The lexical retrieval model describes the process of naming - from the level of an abstract concept representation to the production of the word. Lexical retrieval includes several distinct levels. A deficit in any of these levels causes anomia, a naming deficit, and deficits in different levels cause different types of anomia.
Aims: To examine whether the theoretical model can be applied in the clinic. Namely, whether it is possible to identify, for a specific patient, the exact impaired lexical retrieval level, and to show that different patients are impaired in different levels.
Methods: The performance of 24 participants with aphasia, with lexical retrieval deficits, were analyzed. The analysis included performance on a naming test - including analysis of error types and of the effects that modulate naming errors. We also analyzed the performance in other language tasks that examine the different levels of lexical retrieval, including tasks that do not involve naming.
Results: Different types of anomia were found for the different participants. The various types of anomia are reflected in different sorts of naming errors, in different effects that modulate naming errors, and in different performance patterns in the other language tasks.
Conclusions: The theoretical model of lexical retrieval can underpin descriptions of clinical phenomena. The findings support the view that the relations between theory and clinic are bidirectional - theories constitute an anchor for the description of clinical phenomena, and clinical findings can support, or refute, theory.
Discussion: The distinction between the different types of anomia is important for choosing the appropriate treatment for each patient.