1985
DOI: 10.1016/0021-9924(85)90010-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sign language, pantomime, and gestural processing in aphasic persons: A review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1987
1987
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Pedelty (1987) compared the gesture production in persons with nonfluent aphasia and persons with fluent aphasia and found that the quality of the gestures varied but the amount of gesture between the two groups did not differ. Christopoulou and Bonvillian (1985) also found no obvious relationship between severity of aphasia and the quality and quantity of gestures produced between persons with nonfluent and fluent aphasia. They concluded that although previous studies documented impairment in both the gestural and language skills of persons with aphasia, the gestural skills were not as impaired as the language skills.…”
mentioning
confidence: 70%
“…Pedelty (1987) compared the gesture production in persons with nonfluent aphasia and persons with fluent aphasia and found that the quality of the gestures varied but the amount of gesture between the two groups did not differ. Christopoulou and Bonvillian (1985) also found no obvious relationship between severity of aphasia and the quality and quantity of gestures produced between persons with nonfluent and fluent aphasia. They concluded that although previous studies documented impairment in both the gestural and language skills of persons with aphasia, the gestural skills were not as impaired as the language skills.…”
mentioning
confidence: 70%
“…Lastly, two communication methods between a deaf-blind patient and a medical doctor which were the simple touch-based hand-in-hand and smell message delivery by the olfaction system were compared to demonstrate the advantages of the olfaction interface for an message delivery system over the touch-based approach (Figure A). Touch-based message delivery is one of the important communication methods for deaf-blind individuals. , However, in many cases, such as in hospitals and other public places, a large number of people are not trained in sign language or Braille reading due to their learning difficulties and lengthy training duration, therefore causing barriers to information exchange hand-in-hand. Meanwhile, the hand-to-hand transmission of information can result in contact contamination among people, which increases the risk of bacterial or viral cross-infection. , Compared to the conventional communication method, the wireless olfaction system can provide a message delivery system wirelessly among individuals in noncontact ways.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Deafness and blindness are significant physical disabilities that extensively limit the activities of daily life by tremendously narrowing the interacting methods including audio and visual perception. Thus, patients, suffering from complete or partial vision and hearing loss, may encounter uncomfortable situations especially when they have to communicate with others who are not trained in augmentative and alternative communication including Braille or sign language. , Clinically, a number of approaches have been developed based on tactile methods (e.g., finger Braille and Tadoma) for facilitating deaf-blind patients to establish partial communication with others. However, up to now, there are still unsettled obstacles including the complicated learning process, low communication efficiency, short communication distance induced by tactile inputs, and low throughput (one-to-multiple crosstalk). For example, for sign language, although repeated training was conducted on patients, they showed difficulties in reproducing and embracing the specific gestures, while it took 18 months to fluently manage the sign language. , In addition, for Braille reading, the learning rate of this tactile communicating method was highly dependent on physical conditions such as age, gender, handedness, and the presence of haptic and visual aids. , Furthermore, for people who were beginners to Braille reading, mistakes in reading still existed even after a few months of training . Meanwhile, the conventional alternatives are still limited in their low communication efficiency and throughput.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation