ASHAWire
Advanced search
Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
No AccessAmerican Journal of Speech-Language PathologyResearch Article21 Nov 2018

An Integrative Analysis of Spontaneous Storytelling Discourse in Aphasia: Relationship With Listeners' Rating and Prediction of Severity and Fluency Status of Aphasia

    https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_AJSLP-18-0015

    Abstract

    Purpose

    This study investigated which of the three analytic approaches of oral discourse, including linguistically based measures, proposition-based measures, and story grammar, best correlated with aphasia severity and with naïve listeners' ratings on aphasic productions. The predictive power of these analytic approaches to aphasia severity and fluency status of people with aphasia (PWA) was examined. Finally, which approach best discriminated fluent versus nonfluent PWA was determined.

    Method

    Audio files and orthographic transcriptions of the storytelling task “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” from 68 PWA and 68 controls were extracted from the Cantonese AphasiaBank. Each transcript was analyzed using these 3 systems.

    Results

    The linguistic approach of discourse analysis best correlated with aphasia severity and naïve listeners' subjective ratings. Although both linguistically based and proposition-based measures significantly predicted aphasia severity, a subset of linguistic measures focusing on the quantity and efficiency of production were particularly useful for clinical estimation of the fluency status of aphasia.

    Conclusions

    The linguistically based measures appeared to be the most clinically effective and powerful in reflecting PWA's performance of spoken discourse.

    References

    • Andreetta, S., Cantagallo, A., & Marini, A. (2012). Narrative discourse in anomic aphasia.Neuropsychologia, 50(8), 1787–1793.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Armstrong, L., Brady, M., Mackenzie, C., & Norrie, J. (2007). Transcription-less analysis of aphasic discourse: A clinician's dream or a possibility?.Aphasiology, 21(3/4), 355–374.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Blanken, G., Dittmann, J., Grimm, H., Marshall, J. C., & Wallesch, C.-W. (2008). Linguistic disorders and pathologies: An international handbook. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Boles, L. (1997). Conversational analysis as a dependent measure in communication therapy with four individuals with aphasia.Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing, 2, 43–61.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Coppens, P., & Patterson, J. (2017). Aphasia rehabilitation: Clinical challenges. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
      Google Scholar
    • Croteau, C., & Le Dorze, G. (2001). Spouses' perceptions of persons with aphasia.Aphasiology, 15, 811–825. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687040143000221
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Dalton, S. G., & Richardson, J. D. (2015). Core-lexicon and main-concept production during picture sequence description in non-brain-damaged adults and adults with aphasia.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 24, 923–938.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Duffy, J. R., Boyle, M., & Plattner, L. (1980). Listener reactions to personal characteristics of fluent and nonfluent aphasic speakers.In R. H. Brookshire (Ed.), Clinical aphasiology: Proceedings of the conference (pp. 117–126). Minneapolis, MN: BRK Publishers.
      Google Scholar
    • Gao, S., & Benson, F. (1990). Aphasia after stroke in native Chinese speakers.Aphasiology, 4, 31–43.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Hallé, M. C., & Le Dorze, G. (2014). Understanding significant others' experience of aphasia and rehabilitation following stroke.Disabilities and Rehabilitation, 36(21), 1774–1782. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.870608
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Harmon, T. G., Jacks, A., Haley, K. L., & Faldowski, R. A. (2016). Listener perceptions of simulated fluent speech in nonfluent aphasia.Aphasiology, 30(8), 922–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2015.1077925
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Hilger, A., Ramsberger, G., Gilley, P., Menn, L., & Kong, A. P. H. (2014). Analysing speech problems in a longitudinal case study of logopenic variant PPA.Aphasiology, 28(7), 840–861. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2014.895974
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Kok, P., van Doorn, A., & Kolk, H. (2007). Inflection and computational load in agrammatic speech.Brain and Language, 102(3), 273–283.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H. (2006). A Cantonese Linguistic Communication Measure for evaluating aphasic narrative production (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
      Google Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H. (2009). The use of main concept analysis to measure discourse production in Cantonese-speaking persons with aphasia: A preliminary report.Journal of Communication Disorders, 42, 442–464.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H. (2011). Family members' report on speech-language pathology and community services for persons with aphasia in Hong Kong.Disability and Rehabilitation, 33, 2633–2645.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H. (2016). Analysis of neurogenic disordered discourse production: From theory to practice. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H. (2017). Speech-language services for Chinese-speaking people with aphasia (C-PWA): Considerations for assessment and intervention.Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 2(3), 100–109.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H., & Law, S. P. (2004). A Cantonese Linguistic Communication Measure for evaluating aphasic narrative production: Normative and preliminary aphasic data.Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders, 2, 124–146.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H., & Law, S. P. (2009). A linguistic communication measure for monitoring changes in Chinese aphasic narrative production.Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 23(4), 255–269.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H., & Law, S. P. (2018). Cantonese AphasiaBank: An annotated database of spoken discourse and co-verbal gestures by healthy and language-impaired native Cantonese speakers.Behavior Research Methods. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1043-6
      Google Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H., Linnik, A., Law, S., & Shum, W. (2017, March). Measuring discourse coherence in anomic aphasia using Rhetorical Structure Theory.International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2017.1293158
      Google Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H., Whiteside, J., & Bargmann, P. (2016). The main concept analysis: Validation and sensitivity in differentiating discourse produced by unimpaired English speakers from individuals with aphasia and dementia of Alzheimer type.Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology, 41(3), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.3109/14015439.2015.1041551
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Kong, A. P. H., & Yeh, C. C. (2015). A Taiwanese Mandarin Main Concept Analysis (TM-MCA) for quantification of aphasic oral discourse.International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 50(5), 580–592. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12157
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Koo, C. Y. (2006). Narrative production of Cantonese aphasic patients (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
      Google Scholar
    • Landau, S., & Everitt, B. S. (2004). A handbook of statistical analyses using SPSS. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
      Google Scholar
    • Law, S. P. (2001). A quantitative analysis of Cantonese aphasic production.Journal of Psychology in Chinese Society, 2, 211–237.
      Google Scholar
    • Law, S. P., Kong, A. P. H., Lai, L. W. S., & Lai, C. (2015). Effects of context and word class on lexical retrieval in Chinese speakers with anomic aphasia.Aphasiology, 29(1), 81–100.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Lê, K., Coelho, C., Mozeiko, J., & Grafman, J. (2011). Measuring goodness of story narratives: Implications for traumatic brain injury.Aphasiology, 25(6–7), 748–760.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Light, L. L. (1993). Language changes in old age.In G. Blanken, J. Dittmann, H. Grimm, J. C. Marshall, & C.-W. Wallesch (Eds.), Linguistic disorders and pathologies (pp. 900–918). Berlin, Germany/New York, NY: de Gruyter.
      Google Scholar
    • Longacre, R. E. (1996). The grammar of discourse: Topics in language and linguistics. New York, NY: Plenum.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • MacWhinney, B., Fromm, D., Holland, A., Forbes, M., & Wright, H. (2010). Automated analysis of the Cinderella story.Aphasiology, 24(6–8), 856–868. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030903452632
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Mandler, J. M., & Johnson, N. S. (1977). Remembrance of things parsed: Story structure and recall.Cognitive Psychology, 9, 111–151.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Menn, L., Ramsberger, G., & Helm-Estabrooks, N. (1994). A linguistic communication measure for aphasic narratives.Aphasiology, 8, 343–359.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Nicholas, L. E., & Brookshire, R. H. (1993). A system for quantifying the informativeness and efficiency of the connected speech of adults with aphasia.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 338–350.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Nicholas, L. E., & Brookshire, R. H. (1995). Presence, completeness, and accuracy of main concepts in the connected speech of non-brain-damaged adults and adults with aphasia.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38(1), 145–156.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Richardson, J. D., & Hudspeth, S. G. (2014a). Main concept production in persons with aphasia: A comparison of subtypes. Paper presented at Clinical Aphasiology Conference: Clinical Aphasiology Conference (44th), St. Simons Island, GA.
      Google Scholar
    • Richardson, J. D., & Hudspeth, S. G. (2014b). Story grammar analysis in persons with mild aphasia. Paper presented at Clinical Aphasiology Conference: Clinical Aphasiology Conference (44th), St. Simons Island, GA.
      Google Scholar
    • Richardson, J. D., & Dalton, S. C. (2016). Main concepts for three different discourse tasks in a large non-clinical sample.Aphasiology, 30(1), 45–73.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Saffran, E. M., Berndt, R. S., & Schwartz, M. F. (1989). The quantitative analysis of agrammatic production: Procedure and data.Brain and Language, 37, 440–479.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Stein, N. L., & Glenn, C. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children.In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (pp. 53–120). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
      Google Scholar
    • Ulatowska, H. K., Freedman-Stern, R., Doyel, A. W., Macaluso-Haynes, S., & North, A. J. (1983). Production of narrative discourse in aphasia.Brain and Language, 19(2), 317–334.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Van Dijk, T. A. (1980). Macrostructures: An interdisciplinary study of global structures in discourse, interaction, and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
      Google Scholar
    • Yiu, E. M. L. (1992). Linguistic assessment of Chinese-speaking aphasics: Development of a Cantonese aphasia battery.Journal of Neurolinguistics, 7, 379–424.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Yu, Z., Jiang, S., Bi, S., Li, J., Lei, D., & Sun, L. (2013). Relationship between linguistic functions and cognitive functions in a clinical study of Chinese patients with post-stroke aphasia.Chinese Medical Journal, 126(7), 1252–1256.
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Zasler, N., Katz, D., & Zafonte, R. D. (2007). Brain injury medicine: Principles and practice. New York, NY: Demos Medical Publishing.
      Google Scholar

    Additional Resources