Display options
Cite
Richardson JD, Dalton SG, Greenslade KJ, et al. Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar Analyses of Cinderella Narratives in a Large Sample of Persons with Aphasia. Brain Sci. 2021;11(1)doi: 10.3390/brainsci11010110.
Richardson, J. D., Dalton, S. G., Greenslade, K. J., Jacks, A., Haley, K. L., & Adams, J. (2021). Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar Analyses of Cinderella Narratives in a Large Sample of Persons with Aphasia. Brain sciences, 11(1), . https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11010110
Richardson, Jessica D, et al. "Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar Analyses of Cinderella Narratives in a Large Sample of Persons with Aphasia." Brain sciences vol. 11,1 (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11010110
Richardson JD, Dalton SG, Greenslade KJ, Jacks A, Haley KL, Adams J. Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar Analyses of Cinderella Narratives in a Large Sample of Persons with Aphasia. Brain Sci. 2021 Jan 15;11(1). doi: 10.3390/brainsci11010110. PMID: 33467602; PMCID: PMC7830981.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Brain Sci. 2021 Jan 15;11(1). doi: 10.3390/brainsci11010110.

Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar Analyses of Cinderella Narratives in a Large Sample of Persons with Aphasia.

Brain sciences

Jessica D Richardson, Sarah Grace Dalton, Kathryn J Greenslade, Adam Jacks, Katarina L Haley, Janet Adams

Affiliations

  1. Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA.
  2. Department of Speech-Pathology and Audiology, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI 53233, USA.
  3. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA.
  4. Department of Allied Health Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.

PMID: 33467602 PMCID: PMC7830981 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci11010110

Abstract

Recently, a multilevel analytic approach called Main Concept, Sequencing, and Story Grammar (MSSG) was presented along with preliminary normative information. MSSG analyses leverage the strong psychometrics and rich procedural knowledge of both main concept analysis and story grammar component coding, complementing it with easy-to-obtain sequencing information for a rich understanding of discourse informativeness and macrostructure. This study is the next critical step for demonstrating the clinical usefulness of MSSG's six variables (main concept composite, sequencing, main concept+sequencing, essential story grammar components, total episodic components, and episodic complexity) for persons with aphasia (PWAs). We present descriptive statistical information for MSSG variables for a large sample of PWAs and compare their performance to a large sample of persons not brain injured (PNBIs). We observed significant differences between PWAs and PNBIs for all MSSG variables. These differences occurred at the omnibus group level and for each aphasia subtype, even for PWAs with very mild impairment that is not detected with standardized aphasia assessment. Differences between PWAs and PNBIs were also practically significant, with medium to large effect sizes observed for nearly all aphasia subtypes and MSSG variables. This work deepens our understanding of discourse informativeness and macrostructure in PWAs and further develops an efficient tool for research and clinical use. Future research should investigate ways to expand MSSG analyses and to improve sensitivity and specificity.

Keywords: AphasiaBank; Cinderella; MSSG; aphasia; discourse; episode; main concept analysis; narrative; sequencing; story grammar

References

  1. Clin Linguist Phon. 2010 Feb;24(2):141-54 - PubMed
  2. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018 Mar 1;27(1S):406-422 - PubMed
  3. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008 May;79(5):530-4 - PubMed
  4. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2016 Oct;41(3):129-41 - PubMed
  5. J Commun Disord. 2009 Nov-Dec;42(6):442-64 - PubMed
  6. Stroke. 2009 Apr;40(4):1032-7 - PubMed
  7. Semin Speech Lang. 2020 Jan;41(1):45-60 - PubMed
  8. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2020 Feb 21;29(1S):449-462 - PubMed
  9. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2012 Feb;141(1):2-18 - PubMed
  10. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2014 Oct;45(4):277-90 - PubMed
  11. Brain Inj. 2020;34(1):98-109 - PubMed
  12. Brain Lang. 1981 Jul;13(2):345-71 - PubMed
  13. Adv Med. 2014;2014: - PubMed
  14. Neuropsychologia. 2018 Oct;119:308-319 - PubMed
  15. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2018 Nov;53(6):1078-1093 - PubMed
  16. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2019 Mar 11;28(1S):293-320 - PubMed
  17. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011 Feb;54(1):118-26 - PubMed
  18. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2020 Feb 21;29(1S):437-448 - PubMed
  19. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2019 Mar 11;28(1S):330-340 - PubMed
  20. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2015 Nov;24(4):S923-38 - PubMed
  21. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2013 May;22(2):S438-48 - PubMed
  22. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2020 Jul 6;:1-16 - PubMed
  23. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2020 Nov 12;29(4):1923-1936 - PubMed
  24. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2017 Nov;52(6):689-732 - PubMed
  25. Semin Speech Lang. 2020 Jan;41(1):32-44 - PubMed
  26. Brain. 1986 Jun;109 ( Pt 3):393-410 - PubMed
  27. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017 Aug 15;26(3):762-768 - PubMed
  28. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011 Feb;54(1):148-59 - PubMed
  29. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020 Mar 23;63(3):710-721 - PubMed
  30. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2014 Jun 1;57(3):966-78 - PubMed
  31. Semin Speech Lang. 2010 Feb;31(1):64-75 - PubMed
  32. Clin Linguist Phon. 2016;30(7):489-518 - PubMed
  33. J Speech Hear Res. 1995 Feb;38(1):145-56 - PubMed
  34. J Speech Hear Disord. 1986 Feb;51(1):8-23 - PubMed
  35. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2020 Mar;34(3):187-199 - PubMed
  36. Infect Dis Model. 2020 Jan 07;5:111-128 - PubMed
  37. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2011 Aug;20(3):233-42 - PubMed
  38. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2019;71(5-6):286-296 - PubMed
  39. Aphasiology. 2020;34(1):119-136 - PubMed
  40. Stroke. 2007 Sep;38(9):2541-8 - PubMed
  41. Brain Lang. 1983 Jul;19(2):317-34 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support