Further evidence on topic use following right hemisphere brain damage: Procedural and descriptive discourse

Aphasiology

Volumn 19, Issue 8, 2005, Pages 731-747

  Brady, Marian ^a   Armstrong, Linda ^b   Mackenzie, Catherine ^c  

^a GLASGOW CALEDONIAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b PERTH ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; APHASIA; ARTICLE; ARTS AND ILLUSTRATION; BRAIN INJURY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVERSATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MENTAL PERFORMANCE; OBSERVER VARIATION; RELIABILITY; RIGHT HEMISPHERE; SCORING SYSTEM; STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 24144456551     PISSN: 02687038     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02687030500141430     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Armstrong, E. (2002). Variation in the discourse of non-brain-damaged speakers on a clinical task. Aphasiology, 16, 647-658.
2. Benton, E., & Bryan, K. (1996). Right cerebral hemisphere damage: Incidence of language problems. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 19, 47-54.
3. Brady, M., Mackenzie, C., & Armstrong, L. (2003). Topic use following right hemisphere brain damage during three semi-structured conversational discourse samples. Aphasiology, 17, 881-904.
4. Brady, M., Mackenzie, C., Poedjianto, N., & Norrie, J. (2005). Picture description in neurologically normal adults: Concepts and topic coherence. Manuscript in preparation.
5. Correia, L., Brookshire, R. H., & Nicholas, L. E. (1990). Aphasic and non-brain-damaged adults' descriptions of aphasia test pictures and gender-biased pictures. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 713-720.
6. Duong, A., Tardif, A., & Ska, B. (2003). Discourse about discourse: What is it and how does it progress in Alzheimer's disease? Brain and Cognition, 53, 177-180.
7. Goodglass, H., Kaplan, E., & Barresi, B. (2001). The Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination; The assessment of aphasia and related disorders (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
8. Hux, K., Sanger, D., Reid, R., & Maschka, A. (1997). Discourse analysis procedures: Reliability issues. Journal of Communication Disorders, 30, 133-150.
9. Joanette, Y., Goulet., P., & Hannequin, D. (1990). Right hemisphere and verbal communication. New York: Springer-Verlag.
10. Lehman, M. T., & Tompkins, C. A. (2000). Inferencing in adults with right hemisphere brain damage: An analysis of conflicting results. Aphasiology, 14, 485-499.
11. Lehman Blake, M. L., Duffy, J. R., Myers, P. S., & Tompkins, C. T. (2002). Prevalence and patterns of right hemisphere cognitive/communication deficits: Retrospective data from an inpatient rehabilitation unit. Aphasiology, 16, 537-547.
12. Li, E. C., Volpe, A. D., Ritterman, S., & Williams, S. E. (1996). Variation in grammatic complexity across three types of discourse. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 20, 180-186.
13. Li, E. C., Williams, S. E., & Volpe, A. D. (1995). The effects of topic and listener familiarity on discourse variables in procedural and narrative discourse tasks. Journal of Communication Disorders, 28, 39-55.
14. Mackenzie, C., Begg, T., Lees, K. R., & Brady, M. (1997). Right hemisphere stroke: Incidence, severity and recovery of language disorders. Final Report to the Stroke Association. Unpublished manuscript.
15. Mackenzie, C., Brady, M., Begg, T., & Lees, K. R. (2001). Communication ability following right hemisphere brain damage: The family perspective. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology, 3, 81-95.
16. Mentis, M., & Prutting, C. A. (1991). Analysis of topic as illustrated in a head-injured and normal adult. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 34, 583-595.
17. Myers, P., & Brookshire, R. H. (1996). Effect of visual and inferential variables on scene descriptions by right-hemisphere-damaged and non-brain-damaged adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 870-880.
18. Myers, P. S. (1999). Right hemisphere damage: Disorders of communication and cognition. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.
19. Myers, P. S. (2001). Towards a definition of RHD syndrome. Aphasiology, 15, 913-918.
20. Orange, J. B., Kertesz, A., & Peacock, J. (1998). Pragmatics in frontal lobe dementia and primary progressive aphasia. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 11, 153-177.
21. Roman, M., Brownell, H. H., Potter, H. H., Seibold, M. S., & Gardner, H. (1987). Script knowledge in right hemisphere-damaged and in normal elderly adults. Brain and Language, 31, 151-170.
22. Shadden, B. B., Burnette, R. B., Eikenberry, B. R., & DiBrezzo, R. (1990). All discourse tasks are not created equally. In T. Prescott (Ed.), Clinical Aphasiology, 20, 327-342.
23. Togher, L. (2001). Discourse sampling in the 21st century. Journal of Communication Disorders, 34, 131-150.
24. Tompkins, C. A. (1995). Right hemisphere communication disorders: Theory and management. San Diego, CA: Singular.
25. Tompkins, C. A., Baumgaertner, A., Lehman, M. T., & Fassbinder, W. (2000). Mechanisms of discourse comprehension impairment after right hemisphere brain damage: Suppression in lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 62-78.
26. Ulatowska, H. K., Allard, L., & Chapman, S. B. (1990). Narrative and procedural discourse in aphasia. In Y. Joanette & H. H. Brownell (Eds.), Discourse ability and brain damage. Theoretical and empirical perspectives (pp. 180-198). New York: Springer-Verlag.
27. Ulatowska, H. K., North, A. J., & Macaluso-Haynes, S. (1981). Production of narrative and procedural discourse in aphasia. Brain & Language, 13, 345-371.
28. Wallace, G. (1999). An inclusive management approach for individuals with right hemisphere deficits. Seminars in Speech and Language, 20, 343-354.