A discursive psychology critique of semantic verbal fluency assessment and its interpretation

Abstract

Semantic verbal fluency (SVF), a psychological assessment method used in experimental research and clinical practice, requires participants to produce as many words as possible from a given superordinate category (e.g., “animals,” “vehicles”). Features of responses, such as the prototypicality and ordering of items, are then interpreted as if revealing details about the organisation—or, in instances of ostensibly atypical performance, disorganisation—of participants’ underlying conceptual and/or semantic systems. In this paper, we draw upon perspectives from Discursive Psychology, particularly the work of Derek Edwards (e.g., Edwards, 1997), to argue against this position. Following critical discussion of SVF’s strongly cognitivist theoretical foundations, we present analyses of social interactions across various contexts, including the real-life administration of the paradigm with a child with autism, to suggest that performance is unavoidably socially mediated rather than solely internally driven. Our arguments challenge SVF’s validity and its role in the description of “cognitive disorder.”

Developmental trends in semantic fluency in preschool children

“…Further let us mention the use of semantic fluency tests as they are not without critics. Some authors question its ecological validity in everyday contexts, as well as methodologies employed in the assessment of the construct of semantic fluency, as they almost always contain some level of interactional variation (Muskett, Body, & Perkins, 2013).…”

The Sally-Anne test: an interactional analysis of a dyadic assessment

“…We suggest that interactional nuances should be taken seriously in their own right, as they are present in any interaction. For example, repetitions, hesitations, pursuits of a response, and the like are drawn on the common stock of general interactional resources (see also Marlaire and Maynard 1990, Muskett et al 2013, Wilkinson 2013. In fact, neat question-answer sequences might be less common in human interactions, thus posing important considerations in tasks building on a question-answer structure.…”

“…As a result, the interactions through which these tasks are carried out in the first place have remained largely unexamined. As Muskett et al 2013 note, the findings derived from assessment protocols are often 'artefacts of the methodology's design yet are protected from critical analysis, as information potentially undermining of their validity is not recorded' (p. 222). Moreover, the same authors suggest (in the context of the SVF test) that the application of an assessment protocol may (inadvertently) produce findings of limited competence on the side of children.…”

“…Importantly, recent studies have shown that testees can modify their responses based on the feedback moves from the tester, or the lack thereof. Muskett et al (2013) examined a Semantic Verbal Fluency (SVF) test involving a child with autism, whose task was to produce exemplars of different categories, such as 'animals' or 'vehicles', in a given time. The child listed items collaboratively with an assessor, who participated by producing head nods and evaluations (e.g., 'yer doing really well'), apparently encouraging the child to continue.…”

“…CA work has been applied in diverse settings, including doctor–patient consultations (Heath ), standardized assessment situations (Marlaire and Maynard , Maynard , Muskett et al . , involving children with ASD, Wilkinson involving adults with aphasia, and conversations between care staff and clients with intellectual disabilities, Antaki et al . ).…”