Communicative Informativeness in Aphasia: Investigating the Relationship Between Linguistic and Perceptual Measures

Webster, Janet; Morris, Julie

doi:10.1044/2019_ajslp-18-0256

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, one respondent wrote, "I may make hash marks or take other notes of errors or successes vs. full transcription." Although we were not able to ascertain the specific perceptual rating scales used by respondents here, it is important to note that there is mounting evidence that perceptual rating can be a useful tool for discourse analysis in aphasia (e.g., Doyle et al, 1996;Webster & Morris, 2019). However, there are relatively few validated perceptual rating scales specific to spoken discourse in aphasia (e.g., Casilio et al, 2019;Kim & Wright, 2020), and use of non-validated perceptual rating scales contributes to issues with reproducibility.…”

Section: Spoken Discourse Data Collection Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spoken Discourse Assessment and Analysis in Aphasia: An International Survey of Current Practices

Stark

Dutta

Murray

et al. 2021

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Spoken discourse analysis is commonly employed in the assessment and treatment of people living with aphasia, yet there is no standardization in assessment, analysis, or reporting procedures, thereby precluding comparison/meta-analyses of data and hindering replication of findings. An important first step is to identify current practices in collecting and analyzing spoken discourse in aphasia. Thus, this study surveyed current practices, with the goal of working toward standardizing spoken discourse assessment first in research settings with subsequent implementation into clinical settings. Method A mixed-methods (quantitative and qualitative) survey was publicized to researchers and clinicians around the globe who have collected and/or analyzed spoken discourse data in aphasia. The survey data were collected between September and November 2019. Results Of the 201 individuals who consented to participate, 189 completed all mandatory questions in the survey (with fewer completing nonmandatory response questions). The majority of respondents reported barriers to utilizing discourse including transcription, coding, and analysis. The most common barrier was time (e.g., lack of time). Respondents also indicated that there was a lack of, and a need for, psychometric properties and normative data for spoken discourse use in the assessment and treatment of persons with aphasia. Quantitative and qualitative results are described in detail. Conclusions The current survey study evaluated spoken discourse methods in aphasia across research and clinical settings. Findings from this study will be used to guide development of process standardization in spoken discourse and for the creation of a psychometric and normative property database. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.166395100

show abstract

Section: Spoken Discourse Data Collection Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spoken Discourse Assessment and Analysis in Aphasia: An International Survey of Current Practices

Stark

Dutta

Murray

et al. 2021

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Spoken Discourse Data Collection Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 93%

Spoken Discourse Assessment and Analysis in Aphasia: An International Survey of Current Practices

Stark¹,

Dutta²,

Murray³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Spoken discourse analysis is commonly employed in the assessment and treatment of people living with aphasia, yet there is no standardization in assessment, analysis, or reporting procedures, thereby precluding comparison/meta-analyses of data and hindering replication of findings. An important first step is to identify current practices in acquiring, analyzing, and reporting spoken discourse information in aphasia. Thus, this study surveyed current practices, with the goal of working toward standardizing assessment, analysis, and reporting, first in research settings with subsequent implementation in clinical settings.Method: A mixed-methods (quantitative, qualitative) survey was publicized to researchers and clinicians around the globe who have collected and/or analyzed spoken discourse data in aphasia. The survey data were collected between September and November 2019.Results: Of the 201 individuals who consented to participate, 189 completed the entire survey. The majority of respondents reported barriers to utilizing discourse including transcription, coding, and analysis. The most common barrier was time (e.g., lack of time). Respondents also indicated that there was a lack of, and a need for, psychometric properties and normative data for spoken discourse use in the assessment and treatment of persons with aphasia. Quantitative and qualitative results are described in detail. Conclusions: The current survey study evaluated spoken discourse methods in aphasia across research and clinical settings. Findings from the current study will be used to guide development of process standardization in spoken discourse, and for the creation of a psychometric and normative property database.

show abstract

“…In clinical linguistics, quite short speech samples are analyzed, and the type of discourse depends on the elicitation task. The most widely used methods of discourse elicitation are tasks containing a picture or picture sequence description (Williams et al, 2010;Bryant;Ferguson;Spencer, 2016), discourse narrative which implies telling a personal story or retelling well-known stories or plots (Behrns et al, 2009;Olness;Ulatowska, 2011), procedural discourse North;Macaluso-Haynes, 1981;Stark, 2019), or conversations (Webster;Morris, 2019). 9-24 All content of Bakhtiniana.…”

Section: Discourse Types and Their Speech Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse Diversity Database (3D) for Clinical Linguistics Research: Design, Development, and Analysis

Mariya

Antonova

Nelubina

et al. 2023

Bakhtiniana, Rev. Estud. Discurso

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discourse Diversity Database (3D) is a corpus designed for clinical linguistics research. It consists of oral speech samples of three different genres: picture-elicited narratives, personal stories, and picture-based instructions. The sub-sections of 3D include recordings by Russian speakers from three independent groups: people with brain tumors before and after tumor removal, people with schizophrenia, and neurologically healthy individuals. This article is devoted to the description of the data collection, the annotation scheme, and the specific characteristics of each sub-section of the corpus.

show abstract

Communicative Informativeness in Aphasia: Investigating the Relationship Between Linguistic and Perceptual Measures

Cited by 15 publications

References 24 publications

Spoken Discourse Assessment and Analysis in Aphasia: An International Survey of Current Practices

Spoken Discourse Assessment and Analysis in Aphasia: An International Survey of Current Practices

Spoken Discourse Assessment and Analysis in Aphasia: An International Survey of Current Practices

Discourse Diversity Database (3D) for Clinical Linguistics Research: Design, Development, and Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About