-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study was to explore how a personal narrative told by a group of eight persons with aphasia differed between written and spoken language, and to compare this with findings from 10 participants in a reference group. The stories were analysed through holistic assessments made by 60 participants without experience of aphasia and through measurement of lexical and syntactic variables. The findings showed that the participants with aphasia generally received lower ratings than the reference group, but also that stories written by participants with aphasia were rated as easier to understand, more interesting, and more coherent than the group's spoken stories. Regression analysis showed that syntax could predict several of the rated variables for the stories told by the participants with aphasia. Results point to the need to include writing training in language rehabilitation in order to increase the ability for persons with aphasia to participate in communicative situations in everyday life.
Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 08/2009; 23(7):507-28. · 0.64 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Writers typically spend a certain proportion of time looking back over the text that they have written. This is likely to serve a number of different functions, which are currently poorly understood. In this article, we present two systems, ScriptLog+ TimeLine and EyeWrite, that adopt different and complementary approaches to exploring this activity by collecting and analyzing combined eye movement and keystroke data from writers composing extended texts. ScriptLog+ TimeLine is a system that is based on an existing keystroke-logging program and uses heuristic, pattern-matching methods to identify reading episodes within eye movement data. EyeWrite is an integrated editor and analysis system that permits identification of the words that the writer fixates and their location within the developing text. We demonstrate how the methods instantiated within these systems can be used to make sense of the large amount of data generated by eyetracking and keystroke logging in order to inform understanding of the cognitive processes that underlie written text production.
Behavior Research Methods 06/2009; 41(2):337-51. · 2.12 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Twenty-seven children, with typical language development (TLD), 8-10 years old and 10-12 years old, were assessed with keystroke-logging in order to investigate their narrative writing. Measures of the writing process and the written product were used. One purpose was to explore how children produce written narratives in on-line production, and to relate the writing process to the written product. The results showed that those children who produced the final text faster, also wrote stories that comprised of more words. In the group of older children, children with better narrative ability used less pause time than those with worse ability, and the girls were faster writers than the boys. We believe that keystroke-logging gives valuable information for the assessment of young children's writing and that it is a potentially valid assessment tool for children from about 10 years of age.
Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology 04/2008; 33(3):143-52. · 0.84 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Most of the previous research on aphasia and writing ability concentrates on the production of words in isolation. The purpose of the current study was to examine the process of producing written texts by clients with aphasia. By using keystroke logging, it was possible to analyse the participants' ongoing work during text writing. Results showed that the participants with aphasia composed their texts in what may be described as a linear way. Edits concerning syntax or text structure were almost absent in the subjects' data, but they spent much time and effort on revising smaller units of text, that is, letters and words, possibly as a result of changing their minds or not being able to realize their intentions. However, these changes did not always result in correctly written words in the final text. The findings are discussed in relation to current writing theories.
Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 03/2008; 22(2):95-110. · 0.64 Impact Factor
