Using AphasiaBank for Discourse Assessment

Abstract

AphasiaBank is a shared, multimedia database for the study of communication in aphasia. This article describes a variety of discourse measurement tools and teaching resources available at the AphasiaBank website. The discourse measurement tools include main concept analysis, core lexicon checklists, correct information unit computation techniques, and other automated analyses using the CLAN program. These tools can be used to measure a variety of aspects of language production for assessment as well as treatment evaluation and clinical research purposes. Importantly, they are intended to help make the discourse analysis process more efficient and reliable. Teaching resources include an online tutorial on aphasia, videos of typical behaviors seen in aphasia, group treatment videos, classroom activities, tutorial screencasts, and conference posters. These resources can be used for a variety of clinical and educational purposes. The AphasiaBank website is part of the larger TalkBank project which provides many other shared databases and resources that are relevant to professionals interested in communication and communication disorders.

Keywords

Aphasia - discourse - CHAT - CLAN

Financial Disclosure

This work is supported by the AphasiaBank grant (R01-DC008524), awarded to Brian MacWhinney at Carnegie Mellon University from NIH-NIDCD.

• References

• 1 Forbes MM, Fromm D, MacWhinney B. AphasiaBank: a resource for clinicians. Semin Speech Lang 2012; 33 (03) 217-222
• 2 MacWhinney B. The Childes Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk: Vol. II: The Database. Mahwah: 2000
• 3 Hameister I, Nickels L. The cat in the tree–using picture descriptions to inform our understanding of conceptualisation in aphasia. Lang Cogn Neurosci 2018; 33 (10) 1296-1314
• 4 Nicholas LE, Brookshire RH. Presence, completeness, and accuracy of main concepts in the connected speech of non-brain-damaged adults and adults with aphasia. J Speech Hear Res 1995; 38 (01) 145-156
• 5 Richardson JD, Dalton SG. Main concepts for three different discourse tasks in a large non-clinical sample. Aphasiology 2016; 30 (01) 45-73
• 6 Richardson JD, Dalton SG. Main concepts for two picture description tasks: an addition to Richardson and Dalton, 2016. Aphasiology 2019; 1-8 . DOI: 10.1080/02687038.2018.1561417
• 7 Dalton SG, Richardson JD. Core-lexicon and main-concept production during picture-sequence description in adults without brain damage and adults with aphasia. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2015; 24 (04) S923-S938
• 8 Tanaka T, Branch W, Dalton SG, Richardson JD. It's raining cats: further development of discourse checklists for picture description tasks. Poster presented at the American-Speech-Language-Hearing Association Convention; November 2016; Philadelphia, PA
• 9 Nicholas LE, Brookshire RH. A system for quantifying the informativeness and efficiency of the connected speech of adults with aphasia. J Speech Hear Res 1993; 36 (02) 338-350
• 10 Fridriksson J, Hubbard HI, Hudspeth SG. , et al. Speech entrainment enables patients with Broca's aphasia to produce fluent speech. Brain 2012; 135 (Pt 12): 3815-3829
• 11 Szabo GB, Fromm D, Heimlich T, Holland A. Script training and its application to everyday life observed in an aphasia center. Paper presented at the Clinical Aphasiology Conference; May 2014; St. Simons Island, GA
• 12 Rochon E, Saffran EM, Berndt RS, Schwartz MF. Quantitative analysis of aphasic sentence production: further development and new data. Brain Lang 2000; 72 (03) 193-218
• 13 Saffran EM, Berndt RS, Schwartz MF. The quantitative analysis of agrammatic production: procedure and data. Brain Lang 1989; 37 (03) 440-479
• 14 Thompson CK, Shapiro LP, Tait ME, Jacobs B, Schneider S, Ballard K. A system for the linguistic analysis of agrammatic language production. Brain Lang 1995; 51 (01) 124-129
• 15 Thompson CK, Cho S, Hsu CJ. , et al. Dissociations between fluency and agrammatism in primary progressive aphasia. Aphasiology 2012; 26 (01) 20-43
• 16 Thompson CK. Northwestern narrative language analysis (NNLA) theory and methodology. Available at: http://anr.northwestern.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/NNLA_REVISED.Fall2015.pdf . Accessed October 14, 2019
• 17 Bryant L, Spencer E, Ferguson A. Clinical use of linguistic discourse analysis for the assessment of language in aphasia. Aphasiology 2017; 31 (10) 1105-1126
• 18 Armstrong E. Aphasic discourse analysis: the story so far. Aphasiology 2000; 14 (09) 875-892
• 19 Bryant L, Ferguson A, Spencer E. Linguistic analysis of discourse in aphasia: a review of the literature. Clin Linguist Phon 2016; 30 (07) 489-518
• 20 Duncan EA, Murray J. The barriers and facilitators to routine outcome measurement by allied health professionals in practice: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 2012; 12 (01) 96
• 21 Simmons-Mackie N, Threats TT, Kagan A. Outcome assessment in aphasia: a survey. J Commun Disord 2005; 38 (01) 1-27
• 22 Dalton SGH, Richardson JD. A large-scale comparison of Main Concept production between persons with aphasia and persons without brain injury. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2019; 28 (1S): 293-320
• 23 MacWhinney B, Fromm D, Holland A, Forbes M, Wright H. Automated analysis of the Cinderella story. Aphasiology 2010; 24 (6-8): 856-868
• 24 Fromm D, Forbes M, Holland A, MacWhinney B. PWAs and PBJs: language for describing a simple procedure. Poster presented at the Clinical Aphasiology Conference; May 2013; Tucson, AZ
• 25 Kim H, Wright HH. Tutorial on core lexicon: development, use, and application. Semin Speech Lang 2020; 41: 20-31
• 26 Dalton SGH, Hubbard HI, Richardson J. Moving toward non-transcription based discourse analysis in stable and progressive aphasia. Semin Speech Lang 2020; 41: 32-44
• 27 Dalton SGH, Kim H, Richardson J, Wright HH. A compendium of core lexicon checklists. Semin Speech Lang 2020; 41: 45-60
• 28 Pritchard M, Hilari K, Cocks N, Dipper L. Reviewing the quality of discourse information measures in aphasia. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2017; 52 (06) 689-732
• 29 Doyle PJ, Tsironas D, Goda AJ, Kalinyak M. The relationship between objective measures and listeners' judgments of the communicative informativeness of the connected discourse of adults with aphasia. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 1996; 5 (03) 53-60
• 30 Boyle M. Stability of word-retrieval errors with the AphasiaBank stimuli. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2015; 24 (04) S953-S960
• 31 Casilio M, Rising K, Beeson PM, Bunton K, Wilson SM. Auditory-perceptual rating of connected speech in aphasia. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2019; 28 (02) 550-568
• 32 Colantuoni DE. The Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Narrative Abilities in Primary Progressive Aphasia. Master's Thesis. College Park, MD: University of Maryland; 2018
• 33 Faroqi-Shah Y, Milman L, Pranger M, Damele D, Leiva A, Neuharth M. Identifying reliable discourse measures for second language speakers of English. Presentation at the annual convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Philadelphia, PA; November 2016
• 34 Fromm D, Greenhouse J, Hou K. , et al. Automated proposition density analysis for discourse in aphasia. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2016; 59 (05) 1123-1132
• 35 Hsu CJ, Thompson CK. Manual versus automated narrative analysis of agrammatic production patterns: the northwestern narrative language analysis and computerized language analysis. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2018; 61 (02) 373-385
• 36 Loughnane M, Murray L. Communicative efficiency and executive function in normally aging and older adults with a mild acquired brain injury. Aphasiology 2018; 32 (01) 130-132
• 37 Stark BC. A comparison of three discourse elicitation methods in aphasia and age-matched adults: implications for language assessment and outcome. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2019; 28 (03) 1067-1083
• 38 Thorne J, Faroqi-Shah Y. Verb production in aphasia: testing the division of labor between syntax and semantics. Semin Speech Lang 2016; 37 (01) 023-033