Speaker-Versus Listener-Oriented Disfluency: A Re-examination of Arguments and Assumptions from Autism Spectrum Disorder

Engelhardt, Paul E.; Alfridijanta, Oliver; McMullon, Mhairi E. G.; Corley, Martin

doi:10.1007/s10803-017-3215-0

Cited by 19 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 77 publications

(99 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This aspect of um (the fact that it is listener-oriented) has been used as an explanation for why it is less commonly used by autistic speakers. However, like is also a listener-oriented discourse marker (Engelhardt et al, 2017;Irvine et al, 2016;Lake et al, 2011), so our findings suggest that listeneroriented discourse markers are not generally elusive to autistic individuals. Fox Tree (2007) demonstrates that like and um are in complementary distribution, which shows that these terms are not interchangeable.…”

Section: Overall Frequencymentioning

confidence: 51%

“…As discussed in the introduction section of this manuscript, um is a listener-oriented discourse marker (as opposed to speaker-oriented), which means that it is used to benefit the listener (Engelhardt et al, 2017; Lake et al, 2011). This aspect of um (the fact that it is listener-oriented) has been used as an explanation for why it is less commonly used by autistic speakers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidence that the use of discourse markers is divergent in autism comes from a substantial body of work on words that are used to fill pauses, specifically uh or um (Clark & Fox Tree, 2002; Engelhardt et al, 2017; Fox Tree, 2001; Lake et al, 2011; McGregor & Hadden, 2020). During a conversational exchange, if a speaker pauses, the listener may assume that the speaker has completed a turn and is ready for the listener to take the conversational floor.…”

Section: The Use Of Discourse Markers In Autismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research on discourse markers in autism (usually um and uh ) has often suffered from a similar limitation. While researchers have utilized a wide variety of discourse tasks to explore usage, almost all research examines the way that participants engage with either a research assistant or test administrator (in the case of ADOS conversations, for example) (de Marchena & Eigsti, 2016; Engelhardt et al, 2017; Geelhand et al, 2020; Gorman et al, 2016; Irvine et al, 2016; Lunsford et al, 2010; Parish-Morris et al, 2017; Wechsler, 1997), just as we did in the current study. These authors, like us, find that um use is less frequent in autism.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Like, it's important: The frequency and use of the discourse marker like in older autistic children

Jones

Zane

Grossman

2022

Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background & Aims Discourse markers, such as well or like, serve a variety of functions to support conversational reciprocity: filling pauses, aiding word-finding, and modulating turn-taking by holding the conversational floor. Previous research shows that autistic individuals use discourse markers less frequently than non-autistic (NonAu) peers; however, the discourse marker like has not been included in that research, despite its ubiquitous use by NonAu individuals, and despite the fact that like serves important pragmatic functions that are not encoded by any other discourse marker. Specifically, like signals to the listener that the content of upcoming speech is 1) Important/new; 2) Loose/approximate; 3) Reformulative; or 4) Quotative. The current study addresses this gap in the literature by comparing the frequency of discourse marker like use between older autistic and non-autistic children as well as exploring patterns of usage between the four like functions. Methods Twenty-one 10-to-17-year-old children on the autism spectrum and 20 NonAu peers—statistically matched on age, sex, IQ and language scores—engaged in a semi-structured interview with a researcher. Uses of discourse-marker like were identified from written transcripts of interviews and each use was categorized into one of the four functions. Results There were no significant differences in like frequencies between groups, nor were there differences in relative proportions of functions used by each group. Conclusions Research consistently indicates that autistic individuals use discourse markers significantly less often than their NonAu counterparts, but the findings from our study suggest that this pattern does not persist to all such markers. This group of older autistic children use like as often as their peers and use it to signify similar information about upcoming speech to their listener.

show abstract

Section: Overall Frequencymentioning

confidence: 51%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Use Of Discourse Markers In Autismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Like, it's important: The frequency and use of the discourse marker like in older autistic children

Jones

Zane

Grossman

2022

Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lake et al showed a dissociation in which individuals with High-Functioning Autism (HFA) produced fewer filled pauses and repairs, and more unfilled pauses and repetitions when compared to typically developing controls (cf. Engelhardt, Alfridijanta, McMullon, & Corley, 2017). They argued that the former are listener-oriented and the latter are speaker-oriented.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual differences in the production of disfluency: A latent variable analysis of memory ability and verbal intelligence

Engelhardt

McMullon

Corley

2018

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent work has begun to focus on the role that individual differences in executive function and intelligence have on the production of fluent speech. However, isolating the underlying causes of different types of disfluency has been difficult given the speed and complexity of language production. In this study, we focused on the role of memory abilities and verbal intelligence, and we chose a task that relied heavily on memory for successful performance. Given the task demands, we hypothesised that a substantial proportion of disfluencies would be due to memory retrieval problems. We contrasted memory abilities with individual differences in verbal intelligence as previous work highlighted verbal intelligence as an important factor in disfluency production. A total of 78 participants memorised and repeated 40 syntactically complex sentences, which were recorded and coded for disfluencies. Model comparisons were carried out using hierarchical structural equation modelling. Results showed that repetitions were significantly related to verbal intelligence. Unfilled pauses and repairs, in contrast, were marginally ( p < .09) related to memory abilities. The relationship in all cases was negative. Conclusions explore the link between different types of disfluency and particular problems arising in the course of production, and how individual differences inform theoretical debates in language production.

show abstract

Characteristic Executive Dysfunction for High‐Functioning Autism Sustained to Adulthood

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The comprehensiveness and severity of executive dysfunction in high-functioning autism (HFA) spectrum disorder have not reached a unified conclusion especially in patients in adulthood. Clarifying this issue is critical for guiding clinical diagnosis and targeted intervention. The primary objective of the present meta-analysis was to study the characteristics of executive function (EF) in adults with HFA compared to typically developing (TD) adults, by taking five key components into consideration, including inhibition, working memory, flexibility, planning, and fluency. The PubMed and Embase databases were searched to identify peer-reviewed studies that compared EF in adults with and without HFA from 1980 to November 2018. Hedges' g effect sizes were computed to measure the primary outcome. Moderators like age, sex, and diagnostic tools were controlled using meta-regressions. Forty-two studies satisfying the selection criteria were included, which resulted in a large sample size of 2419 participants. A moderate overall effect size for reduced EF across domains was found in adults with HFA, compared with TD (g = 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.47-0.66). Subsequently, a broad executive dysfunction was found in adults with HFA in this study (flexibility [g = 0.69], planning [g = 0.64], inhibition [g = 0.61], working memory [g = 0.48], fluency [g = 0.42]), with the predominated impairment on flexibility and planning. Taken together, these results provide evidence for the executive dysfunction hypothesis and may assist in the clinical diagnosis and targeted intervention, suggesting the necessity of sustained intervention on EF for individuals with HFA from childhood to adulthood.

show abstract

Speaker-Versus Listener-Oriented Disfluency: A Re-examination of Arguments and Assumptions from Autism Spectrum Disorder

Cited by 19 publications

References 77 publications

Like, it's important: The frequency and use of the discourse marker like in older autistic children

Like, it's important: The frequency and use of the discourse marker like in older autistic children

Individual differences in the production of disfluency: A latent variable analysis of memory ability and verbal intelligence

Characteristic Executive Dysfunction for High‐Functioning Autism Sustained to Adulthood

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About