Ten nonaphasic volunteers and 10 individuals with aphasia were assigned to dyads and videotaped in conversation. Judges ranked each volunteer in the videotaped conversations from 'best' to 'worst' communication partner. The two best and two worst interactions were submitted to detailed analysis using Conversation Analysis (CA) methodology. Discourse devices and resources employed by speaking partners in the dyads were identified. Results abstracted from the CA were compared to contrast discourse characteristics between the high ranked and low ranked partners. Specific strategies identified and implications for aphasia intervention are discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simmons‐Mackie et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: