ACQ Vol 13 No1 2011

9 / 60

Language disorders
ACQ Volume 13, Number 1 2011 7
Adrienne Miles
(top), Natalie
Ciccone (centre)
and Erin
Godecke
This article
has been
peer-
reviewed
Keywords
APHASIA
TOPIC
FAMILIARITY
DISCOURSE
Volpe, 1995; Williams, Li, Della Volpe, & Ritterman, 1994).
These external variables can potentially be manipulated
within a clinical environment to influence the characteristics
of the discourse sample produced. One such element is
topic familiarity (McNeil et al., 2001).
Limited available research examines the relationship
between topic familiarity and discourse production in people
with aphasia. Within their study Williams et al. (1994) asked
a group of 30 non-brain-damaged individuals to rate a list of
84 topics on a scale of very familiar to completely unfamiliar.
From the ratings a list of 10 familiar and 10 unfamiliar topics
was generated. Using these topics Williams et al. (1994)
investigated the impact of topic familiarity on procedural
discourse and story retell production by people with aphasia
and non-brain-damaged individuals. The study found
familiar and unfamiliar topics affected procedural discourse
and story retells differently. The authors reported significant
positive effects of familiar topics, such as increased
quantity of speech for both procedural discourse and story
retell samples, and increased grammatical complexity in
story retells. Conversely, unfamiliar topics resulted in the
production of more content words in story retells and
a greater level of grammatical complexity in procedural
discourse samples (Williams et al., 1994).
Using the familiar and unfamiliar topics generated in
the Williams et al. (1994) study, Li et al. (1995) analysed
procedural discourse and narrative retells produced by
people with aphasia and non-brain-damaged individuals.
They investigated the production of essential and optional
ideas in procedural discourse samples on familiar and
unfamiliar topics. Essentials ideas were classified as points
that were essential to completion of the procedure. Optional
ideas were non-essential points that acted to further clarify
or support the essential ideas. The analysis of essential
and optional ideas was based on previous research that
found, within a structured elicitation context, that people
with aphasia convey information that is essential for the
completion of a procedure; however, they include less
elaborative or optional content when compared to individuals
without aphasia (Ulatowska, Freedman-Stern, Doyel,
Macaluso-Haynes, & North, 1983). Li et al. (1995) found
that the discourse samples on familiar and unfamiliar topics
contained the same number of essential ideas but unfamiliar
topics elicited fewer optional ideas. Similar results were
found in the story retell context in which participants recalled
more story details in response to familiar topics (Li et al.,
1995). Taken together, the Williams et al. (1994) and Li et al.
(1995) studies demonstrated that topic familiar discourse
This paper presents an investigation into the
effect of topic familiarity on discourse
production in an individual with chronic
post-stroke aphasia. The participant produced
procedural narrative discourse samples within
a retell context with the topics identified as
familiar or unfamiliar by the participant. To
establish the level of familiarity the participant
ranked 20 topics from most to least familiar.
The five most and least familiar topics were
then used as discourse sample stimuli. These
samples were compared on multiple discourse
measures in order to examine the impact of
topic familiarity across different levels of the
language system. Overall the unfamiliar
procedural topics resulted in less successful
communicative output. The results of this
study lend support to literature suggesting
topic familiarity influences discourse
production. This study has clinical implications
for the assessment and treatment of
individuals with aphasia.
D iscourse production results from the interplay
between social, linguistic, and cognitive elements of
a communication setting (Ulatowska & Bond, 1983)
and so discourse analyses may investigate interactions
between the linguistic and cognitive processes which affect
communication in people with aphasia (Armstrong, 2000;
McNeil, Doyle, Fosset, Park, & Goda, 2001). Discourse
analysis is widely used to examine communication in people
with aphasia (Sherratt, 2007). It provides an opportunity
for the production and analysis of complex communicative
elements that may not be as obvious in standardised
assessment tasks requiring single word production or
comprehension (Armstrong, 2000).
Due to the interaction between linguistic and cognitive
processes, variables external to an individual’s language
system can significantly influence the efficiency and
effectiveness of the system and impact on communicative
success (McNeil, Odell, & Tseng, 1991). External variables,
such as discourse topic or the method of discourse
elicitation, influence the quality and characteristics of the
discourse produced (Armstrong, 2000; Li, Williams, & Della
Effects of topic
familiarity on discourse
in aphasia
A single case study
Adrienne Miles, Natalie Ciccone, and Erin Godecke