No abstract

No abstract

<p class="IATED-Affiliation">Purpose: The aim of the article is to analyse cognitive disorder in persons with aphasia of various aetiology pursuant to brain damage, emphasizing the interdisciplinary cooperation between the professionals of speech therapy and psychology.</p><p class="IATED-Affiliation">Methodology: Seven persons with stroke related aphasia of different aetiology participated in the research. For data processing, psychological, neurological and speech therapeutic detailed reports were applied.</p><p class="IATED-Affiliation">Results: We observed higher incidence of ischaemic stroke than haemorrhagic stroke. Expressive aphasia occurred in 6 of the 7 clients. Attention disorder and thinking disorder occurred in almost all 6 of the clients. Executive functions were impaired in 5.</p><p class="IATED-Affiliation">Conclusion: Given our findings, we tend to aphasia therapy in terms of cognitive rehabilitation. We perceive the interdisciplinary cooperation with specialists from the field of psychology as absolutely necessary. The results of psychological examination of persons with aphasia can significantly influence the effectiveness of speech therapy intervention.</p><p> </p>

Communication pragmatics is frequently disturbed in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), which causes difficulties in the social interaction, and thus it might be one of the obstacles to speech therapy intervention realized in these children. The aim of this paper is to highlight some assessment options of pragmatic communication level using originally created assessment (test) material which aims to pragmatically oriented communication situations relating to daily activities and real life. Ten children with ASD and ten intact children were evaluated within preliminary testing; their choice of an adequate illustration from pair pictures representing communicative and socially orientated situations from everyday life was evaluated. The results of preliminary research revealed that children with ASD showed fewer erroneous answers, and in different areas, than intact children. However, certain areas were evaluated correctly in both groups. Half of the children with child autism did not even make any mistakes at all. The results of qualitative analysis point out that communication pragmatics assessment has to be completed with an individually specific qualitative analysis of the child performance.

No abstract