Can teenagers with traumatic brain injury use Internet chatrooms? A systematic review of the literature and the Internet

References

• Paterson J, Stewart J. Adults with acquired brain injury: Perceptions of their social world. Rehabilitation Nursing 2002; 27: 13–18
   Google Scholar
• Togher L, McDonald S, Code C, Grant S. Training communication partners of people with traumatic brain injury: A randomised controlled trial. Aphasiology 2004; 18: 313–335
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiseman-Hakes C, Stewart ML, Wasserman R, Schuller R. Peer group training of pragmatic skills in adolescents with acquired brain injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 1998; 13: 23–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turkstra LS, McDonald S, DePompei R. Social information processing in adolescents: Data from normally developing adolescents and preliminary data from their peers with traumatic brain injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2001; 5: 469–483
   Google Scholar
• Lash M, DePompei R. Questions about speech and communication after brain injury. TBI Challenge! 2000; 4: 3
   Google Scholar
• Valkenburg PM, Peter J, Schouten AP. Friend networking sites and their relationship to adolescents' well-being and social self-esteem. Cyberpsychology and Behavior 2006; 9: 584–590
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Taylor GH. Research on outcomes of pediatric traumatic brain injury: Current advances and future directions. Developmental Neuropsychology 2004; 25: 199–225
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conoley J, Sheridan S. Pediatric traumatic brain injury: Challenges and interventions for families. Journal of Learning Disabilities 1996; 29: 662–669
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farmer JE, Clippard DS, Luehr-Wiemann Y, Wright E, Owings S. Assessing children with traumatic brain injury during rehabilitation: Promoting school and community reentry. Journal of Learning Disabilities 1996; 29: 532–548
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ylvisaker M. Traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: Children and adolescents, 2nd. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston 1998
   Google Scholar
• Hellawell DJ, Taylor R, Pentland B. Cognitive and psychosocial outcome following moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 1999; 13: 489–504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lash MD,R. Questions about speech and communication after brain injury. TBI Challenge! 2000; 4: 3
   Google Scholar
• Marsh NV, Knight RG. Relationship between cognitive deficits and social skill after head injury. Neuropsychology 1991; 5: 107–117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magnan SS, editor, Mediating discourse online. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2008
   Google Scholar
• Greenfield PM, Subrahmanyam K. Online discourse in a teen chatroom: New codes and new modes of coherence in a visual medium. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 2003; 24: 713–738
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merchant G. Teenagers in cyberspace: An investigation of language use and language change in internet chatrooms. Journal of Research in Reading 2001; 24: 293–306
   Google Scholar
• Discourse analysis of chatroom talk. Available online at: www. neuage.org/neuage_view/bus.html, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Vaccaro M, Hart T, Whyte J, Buchhofer R. Internet use and interest among individuals with traumatic brain injury: A consumer survey. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2007; 2: 85–95
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ehlhardt LA, Sohlberg MM, Glang A, Albin R. TEACH-M: A pilot study evaluating an instructional sequence for persons with impaired memory and executive functions. Brain Injury 2005; 19: 569–583
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godfrey HPD, Shum D. Executive functioning and the application of social skills following traumatic brain injury. Aphasiology 2000; 14: 433–444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todis B, Sohlberg M, Fickas S, Hood D. Making electronic email accessible: Perspectives of people with acquired cognitive impairments, caregivers and professionals. Brain Injury 2005; 19: 389–401
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egan J, Worrall L, Oxenham D. Accessible internet training package helps people with aphasia cross the digital divide. Aphasiology 2004; 18: 265–280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egan J, Worrall L, Oxenham D. An internet training intervention for people with traumatic brain injury: Barriers and outcomes. Brain Injury 2005; 19: 555–568
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wanner A. Mediating discourse online. AILA Applied Linguistics Series 3, SS Magnan. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia 2008; 128
   Google Scholar
• Tynes B. Internet safety gone wild? Sacrificing the educational and psychosocial benefits of online sociale. Journal of Adolescent Research 2007; 22: 575–584
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young Canadians in a wired world. Available online at: http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/internet/safe_passage_parents/chatrooms_safety_p.cfm
   Google Scholar
• Online safety tips for kids ages 13 to 17. Available online at: http://www.microsoft.com/canada/athome/security/children/kidtips13-17.mspx
   Google Scholar
• Gross EF, Logging on, bouncing back: An experimental investigation of online communication following social exclusion. PhD. Dissertation. Los Angeles: University of California; 2006
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs G, “ur a part of it”: Portfolio people and adolescent use of instant messaging. PhD. New York: University of Rochester; 2005
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs GE. Wel what we do: Developing a repertoire of writing practices in an instant messaging world. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 2008; 52: 203–211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howell-Richardson C, Mellar H. A methodology for the analysis of patterns of participation within computer mediated communication courses. Instructional Science 1996; 24: 47–69
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraas M, Balz MA. Expressive electronic journal writing: Freedom of communication for survivors of acquired brain injury. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2008; 37: 115–124
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehlhardt LA, Sohlberg MM, Glang A, Albin R. TEACH-M: A pilot study evaluating an instructional sequence for persons with impaired memory and executive functions. Review, 43 refs. Brain Injury 2005; 19: 569–583
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortensen L. Written discourse and acquired brain impairment: Evaluation of structural and semantic features of personal letters from a Systemic Functional Linguistic perspective. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 2005; 19: 227–247
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson B, Proctor A. Written discourse of adolescents with closed head injury. Brain Injury 2002; 16: 1011–1024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yorkston KM, Jaffe KM, Polissar NL, Liao S, Fay GC. Written language production and neuropsychological function in children with traumatic brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1997; 78: 1096–1102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim IH, Anderson RC, Nguyen-Jahiel K, Archodidou A. Discourse patterns during children's collaborative online discussions. Journal of the Learning Sciences 2007; 16: 333–370
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maness JM. A linguistic analysis of chat reference conversations with 18-24 year-old college students. Journal of Academic Librarianship 2008; 34: 31–38
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartsell T. Who's talking online? A descriptive analysis of gender and online communication. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education 2005; 1: 42–54
   Google Scholar
• Moisey S, van de Keere R. Inclusion and the internet: Teaching adults with mild developmental disabilities to use information and communication technology. Developmental Disabilities Bulletin 2007; 35: 72–102
   Google Scholar
• Nelson BD, Potts B, Carey A. Job-related social networks and communication technology. AAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2006; 22: 1–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peter J, Valkenburg PM, Schouten AP. Precursors of adolescents' use of visual and audio devices during online communication. Computers in Human Behavior 2007; 23: 2473–2487
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sohlberg MM, Ehlhardt LA, Fickas S, Sutcliffe A. A pilot study exploring electronic (or e-mail) mail in users with acquired cognitive-linguistic impairments. Brain Injury 2003; 17: 609–629
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thayer S, Ray S. Online communication preferences across age, gender, and duration of Internet use. CyberPsychology and Behavior 2006; 9: 432–440
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Valkenburg PM, Peter J. Preadolescents' and adolescents' online communication and their closeness to friends. Developmental Psychology 2007; 43: 267–277
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valkenburg PM, Peter J. Online communication and adolescent well-being: Testing the stimulation versus the displacement hypothesis. Computer-Mediated Communication 2007; 12: 1169–1182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Eijnden RJ, Meerkerk GJ, Vermulst AA, Spijkerman R, Engels RC. Online communication, compulsive Internet use, and psychosocial well-being among adolescents: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology 2008; 44: 655–665
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verburg G, Borthwick B, Bennett B, Rumney P. Online support to facilitate the reintegration of students with brain injury: Trials and errors. Neurorehabilitation 2003; 18: 113–123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birch D. Identifying sources of social support. Journal of School Health 1993; 68: 159–61
   Google Scholar
• Caverly D, MacDonald L. Techtalk: Acess to distance education. Journal of Developmental Education 2002; 26: 38–39
   Google Scholar
• Dave L, Edyburn D. Assistive technology and students with mild disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children 2000; 32: 1–23
   Google Scholar
• Holmes ME. A conversational analysis of computer-mediated discourse. 73rd Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association. Boston, MA, 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Subrahmanyam K, Greenfield P. Online communication and adolescent relationships. Future of Children 2008; 18: 119–146
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valkenburg PM, Peter J. Social consequences of the Internet for adolescents: A decade of research. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2009; 18: 1–5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton-Meier LA. A technology user's bill of rights: Lessons learned in chat rooms. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 2004; 47: 606–608
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison DR, Cleveland-Innes M, Koole M, Kappelman J. Revisiting methodological issues in transcript analysis: Negotiated coding and reliability. Internet and Higher Education 2006; 9: 1–8
   Google Scholar
• Zook B, Luken K. Building technology bridges for brain injury support groups. Parks and Recreation 2001; 36: 82–88
   Google Scholar
• Mazur J. Conversation analysis for educational technologists: Theoretical and methodological issues for researching the structures, processes, and meaning of on-line talk. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2nd, DH Onassen. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJUS 2004; 1073–1098
   Google Scholar
• Herring SC. Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning, SA Barab, R Kling, JH Gray. Cambridge University Press, New York, NYUS 2004; 338–376
   Google Scholar
• Reynolds R, Woods R, Baker JD, Handbook of research on electronic surveys and measurements; 2007
   Google Scholar
• Justice M, Espinoza S, Online communication-building learning communities. In: Al JPE, editor. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference. Chesapeake: AACE; 1999. pp 1854–1859
   Google Scholar
• Rössler P. Content analysis in online communication: A challenge for traditional methodology. U-DRaMB. Online social sciences, B Batinic. Hogrefe & Huber, Seattle 2002; 291–307
   Google Scholar
• Wood AF, Smith MJ. Online communication: Linking technology, identity, and culture, 2nd. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ 2005
   Google Scholar
• Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center of Seattle. Majority of teens discuss risky behaviors on MySpace, studies conclude. Entertainment Newsweekly 2009;166
   Google Scholar
• Monfore D, Resource guide on traumatic brain injury. Preventing School Failure 2005;49:58–62
   Google Scholar
• Adams P. Cybertalk in rural Alberta: What adolescents are saying. ATA 2008; 89: 18–21
   Google Scholar
• Thomas-Stonell N, Johnson P, Schuller R, Jutai J. Evaluation of a computer-based program for remediation of cognitive-communication skills. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 1994; 9: 25–37
   Google Scholar
• Making the Internet family friendly. Available online at: http://www.amazon.com/Making-Internet-Family-Friendly-Brian/dp/0785275681, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Assessing computer-mediated communication discourse of a traumatic brain injury survivor. Available online at: http://wvuscholar.wvu.edu:8881//exlibris/dtl/d3_1/apache_media/, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Brain injury resources on the Internet: A brief guide for professional, patients, and families. Available online at: www.angelfire.com/va/MFMartelliPhD/Netsurf_TBI.pdf, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Linguistic aspects of synchronous chat discourse (sketches for reflection). Available online at: http://www.genderstudies.info/english/eng_text13.php, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Computer mediated communication and foreign language education: Pedagogical features. Available online at: http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Dec_08/article02.htm, accessed
   Google Scholar
• THE INTERNET: Accessing human particpants and/or data. Available online at: http://www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/03/25/85/ethics_internet.pdf, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Wang AY, Newlin H, Predictors of cyber-student. University of Central Florida
   Google Scholar
• The chat room phenomenon: Reciprocal communication in cyberspace. Available online at: http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/109493100316003?cookieSet=1&journalCode=cpb, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Internet chatting inside out. Available online at: http://www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTL02/DOC/KacmarovaFINAL.doc, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Raclaw J. Two patterns for conversational closings ini message discourse. Colorado Research in Linguistics 2008; 21: 1–21
   Google Scholar
• Bowker F, Tuffin K. Dicing with deception: People with disabilities' strategies for managing safety and identity online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2003; 8(2)
   Google Scholar
• Kramer ADI, Fussell SR, Setlock LD. Text analysis as a tool for analyzing conversation in online support groups. CHI 2004; 1485–1488
   Google Scholar
• Discourse structure analysis of chat communication. Available online at: http://www.languageatinternet.de/articles/2008/1633, accessed
   Google Scholar
• Kilov A, Togher L, Grant S. Problem solving with friends: Discourse participation and performance of individuals with and without traumatic brain injury. Aphasiology 2009; 23: 584–605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang B, Hughes C. The effects of social interactive training on early social communication skills of children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 2000; 30: 331–343
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemmeter ML. Classroom- based interventions: Evaluating the past and looking towards the future. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 2000; 20: 56–61
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar