Picture description in neurologically normal adults: Concepts and topic coherence

Background: Evaluation of discourse is recognised as an important component in the diagnosis and management of adult acquired communication disorders. Picture description is a common and practical data elicitation procedure that has provided insights into the discourse of many adult groups. Such data may be analysed from several linguistic and pragmatic perspectives and, as is commonly the case with discourse measures, the usefulness of such data is limited by a paucity of relevant normative information. Aim: To determine the influences of age, education, and gender on the concepts and topic coherence of the picture description of non‐brain‐damaged adults. Methods & Procedures: A total of 225 adults described the “cookie theft” picture (Goodglass, Kaplan, & Barresi, 2001 Goodglass, H., Kaplan, E. and Barresi, B. 2001. The Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination, Baltimore: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. [Google Scholar]). Responses were analysed for presence and completeness of concepts (Nicholas & Brookshire, 1995 Nicholas, L. E. and 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: 145–156. [Crossref], [PubMed] , [Google Scholar]) and topic coherence (Mentis & Prutting, 1991 Mentis, M. and Prutting, C. A. 1991. Analysis of topic as illustrated in a head‐injured and normal adult.. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34: 583–595. [Crossref], [PubMed] , [Google Scholar]), modified (Brady, Mackenzie, & Armstrong 2003 Brady, M., Mackenzie, C. and Armstrong, L. 2003. Topic use during right hemisphere brain damage during three semi‐structured conversational discourse samples.. Aphasiology, 17: 881–904. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Outcomes & Results: Both analyses, concept and topic coherence, confirmed education level as a highly important variable affecting the performance of non‐brain‐damaged adults. The number of concepts used accurately and completely, and the amount of topic subdivision, increased with amount of education (both with and without adjustment for age and gender). Clear influences of age or gender were not demonstrated, although some trends in favour of women and younger age were noted, and for one of the seven assessed concepts there was a steady reduction in the odds of being accurate and complete with every 5‐year age increase. Conclusions: Recognition of the impact of education is essential in the assessment and diagnosis of communication difficulty. The authors are grateful to all who participated in this study. Thanks are extended to the following organisations and people for their various valuable contributions to this study: Department of Health, New and Emerging Technology Programme for funding; the participants with aphasia; the transcription‐less raters (Claire Higgins, Dorothy Russell, Kirsty McLaughlan, Lesley Garret, and Sharon Nelson); Caitriona Hutton for additional transcription; and the Speakability group in Forth Valley for their help in producing an aphasia‐friendly information sheet and consent form.