Analysis of Topic as Illustrated in a Head-Injured and a Normal Adult

Mentis, Michelle; Prutting, Carol A.

doi:10.1044/jshr.3403.583

Cited by 84 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…TBI and control subjects asked similar proportions of questions of the researcher which partly accounts for the similar amounts of information giving by the researcher. The ability of TBI subjects to request information has previously been reported to be impaired when compared with matched controls (Schloss et al 1985, Mentis andPrutting 1991). While the frequency of requesting behaviour was similar in this study, the nature of the requests was diåerent.…”

contrasting

confidence: 71%

Giving information: The importance of context on communicative opportunity for people with traumatic brain injury

Togher¹

2000

Aphasiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is one of a series investigating everyday communication skills of people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) using communication partners other than speech pathologists or research assistants. The ®rst of these studies examined telephone conversations where subjects were asked to request speci®c information during telephone interactions with a range of communication partners. Results indicated that people with TBI were disadvantaged in some of their interactions on the telephone with community agencies and family members during information-seeking interactions, when compared with matched controls. TBI subjects were given less information than matched controls and were also asked for less information. For example, therapists never asked TBI subjects questions to which they didn't already know the answer. This was in contrast to the control interactions, where subjects were asked for novel information.In the current study seven subjects with TBI were compared with seven matched control subjects across two conditions: a community education information-giving session with two schoolboys, and an information-requesting interaction with the researcher. Exchange structure analysis showed that when placed in an information-giving role, TBI subjects gave similar amounts of information as control subjects. TBI subjects used joke telling as an information -giving device, serving a number of communicative functions, which are discussed. There was no signi®cant diåerence in the amount of information requested or given by TBI and control subjects in the researcher condition ; however there were signi®cant qualitative diåerences in the nature of the requesting. It has been previously emphasized that people with TBI should be evaluated with a number of interlocutors as part of a thorough communication needs assessment (Hartley 1995). Merely varying the interlocutor is not su¬cient, however, as the goal of the interaction and the primary speaking roles of participants are also important, and will determine the language choices available to both speakers. Exchange structure analysis is a useful way to delineate these language choices, as it is interpreted in light of the genre of the interaction and the tenor and communicative purpose of the participants.

show abstract

contrasting

confidence: 71%

Giving information: The importance of context on communicative opportunity for people with traumatic brain injury

Togher¹

2000

Aphasiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was not appropriate however, to identify 'newly introduced' topics by the participants since in the investigation of the conversational, procedural and descriptive discourse sampling procedures the initial topic introduction was usually made by MB. Instead, drawing on Mentis and Prutting's (1991) method of analysing monologue discourse, patterns of topic and subtopic use were identified.…”

Section: Discourse Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…topic coherence was examined as described by Mentis and Prutting (1991) (also see Appendix A). The topic coherence profile is based on the 'Topic Introduction' section of their conversation topic coherence analysis.…”

Section: Discourse Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

An examination over time of language and discourse production abilities following right hemisphere brain damage

Brady

Armstrong

Mackenzie

2006

Journal of Neurolinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Individuals with TBI commonly appear to have minimal or no language impairment on the basis of traditional aphasia test instruments, yet they demonstrate marked communication difficulties in everyday situations. These difficulties of functional conversation and social interaction are well documented (Bracy & Douglas, 2005;Coelho, Youse, & Le, 2002;Hartley & Jensen, 1991;Liles, Coelho, Duffy, & Zalagens, 1989;McDonald, 1993a;Mentis & Prutting, 1991;Snow, Douglas, & Ponsford, 1997Togher, Hand, & Code, 1997) and they have been variously described as ''subclinical aphasia'' (Sarno, 1980), ''nonaphasic language disturbances'' (Prigatano, Roueche, & Fordyce, 1985), ''cognitive-language disorder'' (Hagen, 1984), and ''cognitive-communicative impairment'' (ASHA, 1988(ASHA, , 1991. The term cognitive-communicative impairment acknowledges that communication difficulties subsequent to TBI reflect a disturbance of the cognitive processes that underpin conversational discourse and interactional ability.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Given the complexity and unpredictability of everyday discourse, no single tool or procedure is likely to provide clinicians with an ecologically valid representation of a client's conversational competence (Douglas, Bracy, & Snow, in press;. Many methods have been applied to discourse analysis following TBI, including analysis of cohesion (Hartley & Jensen, 1991;Mentis & Prutting, 1991), story grammar (Coelho, Liles, & Duffy, 1995;Snow, Douglas, & Ponsford, 1999), sociolinguistic analysis (Togher, 2000;Togher et al, 1997), and Clinical Discourse Analysis (Snow et al, 1997(Snow et al, , 1998. All of these methods require elicitation of representative discourse samples and transcription in order to apply specific analysis protocols.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Exploring the factor structure of the La Trobe Communication Questionnaire: Insights into the nature of communication deficits following traumatic brain injury

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Self and close other reports of communication ability can provide a timeefficient means of evaluating conversational discourse after traumatic brain injury (TBI). The La Trobe Communication Questionnaire (LCQ) measures perceived communication ability from various sources including self-perceptions and perceptions of others. Content and test-retest reliability and discriminant validity of the LCQ have been demonstrated previously with adults following TBI. Aims: This study was undertaken to explore the factor structure of the LCQ as revealed within the data collected from 88 adults with severe TBI and their close others. Methods & Procedures: Construct validity was examined using a Principal Component Factor Analytic procedure with Varimax rotation. Outcomes & Results: A seven-factor structure that accounted for 60.88% of the variance was revealed. Of the LCQ items, 27 clearly loaded on to one of the seven communication factors that were identified. Conclusions: The factor structure that emerged depicts the multidimensional nature of conversation and the complex interplay between cognitive and communication processes that social discourse demands. These results support the construct validity of the LCQ and indicate that it can be used as a reliable and valid measure of communication ability after severe TBI.

show abstract

Analysis of Topic as Illustrated in a Head-Injured and a Normal Adult

Cited by 84 publications

References 26 publications

Giving information: The importance of context on communicative opportunity for people with traumatic brain injury

Giving information: The importance of context on communicative opportunity for people with traumatic brain injury

An examination over time of language and discourse production abilities following right hemisphere brain damage

Exploring the factor structure of the La Trobe Communication Questionnaire: Insights into the nature of communication deficits following traumatic brain injury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About