Three studies evaluated different varieties of elderspeak using a referential communication task. Experiment 1 compared the effects of syntactic simplifications and semantic elaborations. Experiment 2 contrasted syntactic simplifications and prosodic exaggerations. Experiment 3 contrasted 2 different syntactic simplification strategies and 2 different prosodic exaggerations. Providing semantic elaborations and reducing the use of subordinate and embedded clauses benefit older adults and improve their performance on the referential communication task, whereas reducing sentence length, slowing speaking rate, and using high pitch do not. The use of short sentences, a slow rate of speaking, and high pitch resulted in older adults' reporting more communication problems. These experiments validate a version of elderspeak that benefits older adults without sounding patronizing and insulting.
This study examined the use of elderspeak, a speech register targeted at older listeners, during a referential communication task. The task required the listener to reproduce a route drawn on a map following the speaker's instructions. Young adults were paired with older adults who performed naturally or who followed a script simulating dementia to determine if the young adults would modify their fluency, prosody, grammatical complexity, semantic content, or discourse style. When paired with older adults simulating dementia, the young adults' instructions were longer, more informative, and more repetitious; however, the young adults did not alter their prosody or grammatical complexity. Together with previous findings on practice effects on elderspeak, these findings suggest that young adults adjust their speech to the perceived communicative needs of older listeners by varying information content but not by varying information delivery.Elderspeak is addressed to healthy older adults as well as to those who are or are presumed to have dementia (Caporael,
One of the shortcomings of the pathways-to-care literature is the lack of empirical support for the validity of the data collection methods. This study uses three common formats to collect retrospective pathways-to-care data for adults who have been diagnosed with possible or probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) and compares indicators to evaluate their relative validity. Forty family caregivers of adults diagnosed with possible or probable AD were recruited from the caregiver registry of the Boston University Alzheimer's Disease Core Center (BU ADCC). In each of three formats (questionnaire, structured interview, and medical record review), data were collected regarding four key events in the pathway to dementia care: first appearance of symptoms, first verbalized recognition of symptoms, first effort to seek professional help, and first diagnosis by a professional. In addition to the dates of these events, researchers attempted to determine: the first verbalized concern about the symptoms, who first sought professional help, what professional was first approached, and what professional made the first diagnosis. In a consensus meeting, data collected in all three formats were reviewed, and a consensus on the most likely answers to all questions was recorded and compared to data collected in each format. The results suggest that the three formats are not equivalent in terms of concurrent validity. While substantial agreement is found among data collection methods, the validity of the structured interview format and the medical record review is most consistently supported by the data in this study. Questionnaire data resulted in underestimates of delays and correlated poorly with other data sources, including the consensus judgment. Recommendations for pathways-to-care data collection procedures that maximize validity are discussed.
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.