Human society is organised through communicative interactions between co-present people. Speech pathology (SP) assessment and intervention strategies aim to access these sites of communication in order to facilitate participation in life situations for people with communication disorders. Surprisingly, however, there is no explicit theory of communication underpinning SP practice and research. As a result, the conceptual and practical basis for rigorous, empirical measurement of communication remains limited, which is a significant challenge for professional practice and research. This critical review discusses the prevailing ways that co-present communication has been conceptualised and measured in SP. In particular, we examine how models of health have informed current ideas and measurement practices. We argue that although patently valuable for SP, they are largely incommensurate with the realities of co-present communication. Drawing on current empirical research in Sociology and Linguistics, we specify the properties of real-time co-present communication and discuss their relationship to current SP concepts and measurement practices. We conclude by suggesting directions for conceptual development and empirical research that will draw SP assessment and intervention strategies closer to real-time co-present communication.
This article critiques the use of conversation analysis (CA) as applied to the study of family therapy. Searches of relevant databases and journals as well as citation searches were conducted in April 2018 for relevant articles. Inclusion criteria included the explicit use of CA either solely or in combination with discourse analysis and discursive psychology. This resulted in the inclusion of 25 articles that were reviewed against a guideline for the evaluation of qualitative research to which five items specific to CA were added to ensure a specific and balanced evaluation of the studies. Articles generally had a good application of quality criteria although there was a variation in detail of transcription, application of sequence analysis, and a limited use of validity testing. CA has the potential to complement existing research on family therapy but requires a rigorous application of process and quality criteria. The article provides recommendations for future CA research into family therapy.
Background
Training conversation partners of people with aphasia who use facilitative communication strategies is one method that can improve access to healthcare for people with aphasia. However, the efficacy of communication partner training (CPT) has been investigated almost exclusively in the context of face‐to‐face (F2F) delivery. Online training may offer more cost‐effective and accessible options to a wider range of conversation partners, including student healthcare professionals.
Aims
To conduct a pilot randomized controlled trial with student healthcare professionals comparing (1) an online aphasia CPT program, (2) a F2F CPT program and (3) no program (control group) on outcomes relating to attitudes and knowledge of aphasia.
Methods & Procedures
A 45‐min introductory aphasia CPT program was developed using the theories and techniques of Supported Conversations for Adults with Aphasia (SCA)™. A total of 30 first‐year undergraduates studying occupational therapy at The University of Sydney were randomly allocated to one of three conditions: online CPT delivery, F2F delivery or delayed training control (no program). Outcomes measures included pre‐post‐testing with the Aphasia Attitudes, Strategies and Knowledge (AASK) survey.
Outcomes & Results
A significant difference existed for the AASK survey pre‐post‐change scores between the online, F2F and control groups (χ2(2) = 20.038, p = 0.000). Post‐hoc analysis revealed that, compared with the control (Ctrl) group, participants in both the online and F2F groups had significantly higher knowledge of aphasia (Online versus Ctrl: p = 0.000; F2F versus control: p = 0.002), knowledge of facilitative strategies (Online versus Ctrl: p = 0.000; F2F versus Ctrl: p = 0.002), and positive attitudes towards aphasia (Online versus Ctrl: p = 0.031; F2F versus Ctrl: p = 0.032). No significant difference was observed between the online and F2F groups for the Total or any subtotals (p = 1.000).
Conclusions and Implications
The results from this pilot randomized controlled trial indicate that online delivery of the 45‐min introductory CPT is equally as efficacious as F2F delivery, and thus may be a viable mode of delivery for future aphasia CPT programs. These pilot results pave the way for a larger study that will comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of an online aphasia CPT program for improving attitudes, knowledge and skills in a broad range of student healthcare professionals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.