Verbosity, traumatic brain injury, and conversation: A preliminary investigation

References

• Arbuckle, T., Pushkar, D., Bourgeois, S., & Bonneville, L. (2004). Off-target verbosity, everyday competence, and subjective well-being. Gerontology, 50(5), 291–297. https://doi.org/10.1159/000079126
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes, S., & Possemato, F. (2020). Shifting granularity: The case of correction and aphasia. In R. Wilkinson, J. P. Rae, & G. Rasmussen (Eds.), Atypical interaction: The impact of communicative impairments within everyday talk (pp. 225–255). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28799-3_8
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, S., Beeke, S., & Bloch, S. (2020). How is right hemisphere communication disorder disabling? Evidence from response mobilizing actions in conversation. Disability and Rehabilitation, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2020.1766123
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes, S., & Bloch, S. (2019). Why is measuring communication difficult? A critical review of current speech pathology concepts and measures. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 33(3), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2018.1498541
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes, S., Toocaram, S., Nickels, L., Beeke, S., Best, W., & Bloch, S. (2019). Everyday conversation after right hemisphere damage: A methodological demonstration and some preliminary findings. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 52, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2019.100850
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Body, R., & Parker, M. (2005). Topic repetitiveness after traumatic brain injury: An emergent, jointly managed behaviour. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 19(5), 379–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699200400027189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., Duffy, R. J., & Clarkson, J. V. (1993). Conversational patterns of aphasic, closed-head-injured, and normal speakers. Clinical Aphasiology, 21, 183–192. http://aphasiology.pitt.edu/1449/
   Google Scholar
• Coelho, C. A., Youse, K. M., & Le, K. N. (2002). Conversational discourse in closed-head-injured and non-brain-injured adults. Aphasiology, 16(4–6), 659–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030244000275
   Google Scholar
• Doedens, W., & Meteyard, L. (2020). Measures of functional, real-world communication for aphasia: A critical review. Aphasiology, 34(4), 492–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1702848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, J. M., Bracy, C. A., & Snow, P. C. (2007). Measuring perceived communicative ability after traumatic brain injury: Reliability and validity of the La Trobe communication questionnaire. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 22(1), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001199-200701000-00004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, J. M., O’Flaherty, C. A., & Snow, P. C. (2000). Measuring perception of communicative ability: The development and evaluation of the La Trobe communication questionnaire. Aphasiology, 14(3), 251–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/026870300401469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew, P., & Holt, E. (1998). Figures of speech: Figurative expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation. Language in Society, 27(4), 495–522. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500020200
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duff, M. C., Mutlu, B., Byom, L., & Turkstra, L. S. (2012). Beyond utterances: Distributed cognition as a framework for studying discourse in adults with acquired brain injury. Seminars in Speech and Language, 33( 1), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1301162
   Google Scholar
• Ellmo, W., Graser, J., Krchnavek, B., Hauk, K., Calabrese, D. (1995). Measure of Cognitive Linguistic Abilities (MCLA). Norcross, GA: The Speech Bin.
   Google Scholar
• Enfield, N., & Sidnell, J. (2017). The concept of action. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, A. (1998). Conversation turn-taking and repair in fluent aphasia. Aphasiology, 12(11), 1007–1031. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687039808249466
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frankel, T., Penn, C., & Ormond-Brown, D. (2007). Executive dysfunction as an explanatory basis for conversation symptoms of aphasia: A pilot study. Aphasiology, 21(6–8), 814–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030701192448
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedland, D., & Miller, N. (1998). Conversation analysis of communication breakdown after closed head injury. Brain Injury, 12(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/026990598122818
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frith, M., Togher, L., Ferguson, A., Levick, W., & Docking, K. (2014). Assessment practices of speech-language pathologists for cognitive communication disorders following traumatic brain injury in adults: An international survey. Brain Injury, 28(13–14), 1657–1666. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2014.947619
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner, R. (2001). When listeners talk: Response tokens and listener stance. John Benjamins Publishing Co.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1996). Transparent vision. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 370–404). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hepburn, A., & Bolden, G. (2017). Transcribing for social research. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (2002). Oh-Prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In C. Ford, B. Fox, & S. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 196–224). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Joanette, Y., Ska, B., Cote, H., Ferre,P., LaPointe, L., Coppens, P., & Small, S.L. (2015). Montreal Protocol for the Evaluation of Communication (MEC). ASSBI Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Kosch, Y., Browne, S., King, C., Fitzgerald, J., & Cameron, I. (2010). Post-traumatic amnesia and its relationship to the functional outcome of people with severe traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 24(3), 479–485. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699051003610417
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lausberg, H., & Sloetjes, H. (2009). Coding gestural behavior with the NEUROGES-ELAN system. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 41(3), 841–849. https://doi.org/10.3758/BAnnie.41.3.591
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C. (2016). Turn-taking in human communication–origins and implications for language processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(1), 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linscott, R., Knight, R., & Godfrey, H. (1996). The profile of functional impairment in communication (PFIC): A measure of communication impairment for clinical use. Brain Injury, 10(6), 397–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/026990596124269
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacDonald, S. (2017). Introducing the model of cognitive-communication competence: A model to guide evidence-based communication interventions after brain injury. Brain Injury, 31(13–14), 1760–1780. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2017.1379613
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazeland, H. (2007). Parenthetical sequences. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(10), 1816–1869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, A., Huang, H., Montgomery, J. E. B., & Turkstra, L. S. (2015). Conversational turn-taking in adults with acquired brain injury. Aphasiology, 29(2), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2014.959411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkins, M. R. (2005). Pragmatic ability and disability as emergent phenomena. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 19(5), 367–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699200400027155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prutting, C., & Kittchner, D. (1987). A clinical appraisal of the pragmatic aspects of language. The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 52(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshd.5202.105
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1978). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 7–57). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1987). Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation’s turn-taking organization. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp. 70–85). Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52–133). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2000). Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society, 29(1), 1–63. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500001019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2010). Some other “uh(m)”s. Discourse Processes, 47(2), 130–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530903223380
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2013). Ten operations in self-initiated, same-turn repair. In G. Raymond, M. Hayashi, & J. Sidnell (Eds.), Conversational repair and human understanding (pp. 41–70). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Selting, M. (2000). The construction of units in conversational talk. Language in Society, 29(4), 477–517. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500004012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sim, P., Power, E., & Togher, L. (2013). Describing conversations between individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and communication partners following communication partner training: Using exchange structure analysis. Brain Injury, 27(6), 717–742. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2013.775485
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steel, J., & Togher, L. (2019). Social communication assessment after traumatic brain injury: A narrative review of innovations in pragmatic and discourse assessment methods. Brain Injury, 33(1), 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2018.1531304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stivers, T., Enfield, N., Brown, P., Englert, C., Hayashi, M., Heinemann, T., Hoymann, G., Rossano, F., Ruijter, J. P. de, Yoon, K.-E., & Levinson, S. . (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 106(26), 10587–10592. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903616106
   Google Scholar
• Togher, L., McDonald, S., Coelho, C., & Byom, L. (2014). Cognitive communication disability following TBI: Examining discourse, pragmatics, behaviour and executive function. In S. McDonald, L. Togher, & C. Code (Eds.), Social and communication disorders following traumatic brain injury (pp. 89–118). Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Togher, L., Hand, L., & Code, C. (1997). Analysing discourse in the traumatic brain injury population: Telephone interactions with different communication partners. Brain Injury, 11(3), 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/026990597123629
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togher, L., Power, E., Tate, R., McDonald, S., & Rietdijk, R. (2010). Measuring the social interactions of people with traumatic brain injury and their communication partners: The adapted Kagan scales. Aphasiology, 24(6–8), 914–927. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030903422478
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togher, L., Wiseman-Hakes, C., Douglas, J., Stergiou-Kita, M., Ponsford, J., Teasell, R., Bayley, M., & Turkstra, L. S. (2014). INCOG recommendations for management of cognition following traumatic brain injury, part IV: Cognitive communication. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 29(4), 353–368. https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000071
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toglia, J., & Kirk, U. (2000). Understanding awareness deficits following brain injury. NeuroRehabilitation, 15(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-2000-15104
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turkstra, L. S., Brehm, S. E., & Montgomery, E. B. (2006). Analysing conversational discourse after traumatic brain injury: Isn’t it about time? Brain Impairment, 7(3), 234–245. https://doi.org/10.1375/brim.7.3.234
   Google Scholar
• Vatanen, A. (2018). Responding in early overlap: Recognitional onsets in assertion sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(2), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar