Lan Vy Tu1, Leanne Togher, Emma Power. 1. Discipline of Speech Pathology, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia. latu5513@uni.sydney.edu.au
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: This study investigated whether varying the communication partner (i.e. mother vs paid caregiver) and discourse task (i.e. casual conversation vs purposeful conversation vs problem-solving task) affected the nature of information exchange for a person with traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: Three discourse tasks were recorded involving a TBI participant with his mother and, on a separate occasion, with his paid caregiver. Texts were analysed using multiple perspectives, comprising exchange structure analysis, ratings by independent observers and self and others' perceptions of communication. RESULTS: The TBI participant was more likely to give information when interacting with his mother than with the paid caregiver, as shown by exchange structure analysis. The participants also varied the way they exchanged information according to the discourse tasks. Results from exchange structure analysis were corroborated by the ratings by independent observers. Additionally, the mother was found to perceive that the TBI participant 'usually' had communication difficulty, while the caregiver perceived that he 'rarely' had communication difficulty. CONCLUSION: The nature of information exchange for a person with TBI varied with the communication partner and discourse task. The multiple perspectives used in this study appeared promising for the examination of discourse ability following TBI.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: This study investigated whether varying the communication partner (i.e. mother vs paid caregiver) and discourse task (i.e. casual conversation vs purposeful conversation vs problem-solving task) affected the nature of information exchange for a person with traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: Three discourse tasks were recorded involving a TBI participant with his mother and, on a separate occasion, with his paid caregiver. Texts were analysed using multiple perspectives, comprising exchange structure analysis, ratings by independent observers and self and others' perceptions of communication. RESULTS: The TBI participant was more likely to give information when interacting with his mother than with the paid caregiver, as shown by exchange structure analysis. The participants also varied the way they exchanged information according to the discourse tasks. Results from exchange structure analysis were corroborated by the ratings by independent observers. Additionally, the mother was found to perceive that the TBI participant 'usually' had communication difficulty, while the caregiver perceived that he 'rarely' had communication difficulty. CONCLUSION: The nature of information exchange for a person with TBI varied with the communication partner and discourse task. The multiple perspectives used in this study appeared promising for the examination of discourse ability following TBI.