The Nature of Error Consistency in Individuals With Acquired Apraxia of Speech and Aphasia.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	The Nature of Error Consistency in Individuals With Acquired Apraxia of Speech and Aphasia.
Authors:	Bislick, Lauren¹ lauren.bislick@ucf.edu, McNeil, Malcolm^2,3, Spencer, Kristie A.⁴, Yorkston, Kathryn^4,5, Kendall, Diane L.^4,6,7
Source:	American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2017 Supplement J, Vol. 26 Issue 2S, p611-630. 20p. 9 Charts, 7 Graphs.
Subject Terms:	Aphasia, Audiometry, Comparative studies, Speech evaluation, *Data analysis, Speech errors, Speech apraxia, Aphasic persons, Error rates, Mann Whitney U Test, Phonetics, Apraxia, Patients, Hypothesis, Analysis of variance, Chi-squared test, Probability theory, Research evaluation, Research funding, Statistics, Mathematical variables, Video recording, Repeated measures design, Severity of illness index, Medical coding, Descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis Test
Abstract:	Purpose: The primary characteristics used to define acquired apraxia of speech (AOS) have evolved to better reflect a disorder of motor planning/programming. However, there is debate regarding the feature of relatively consistent error location and type. Method: Ten individuals with acquired AOS and aphasia and 11 individuals with aphasia without AOS participated in this study. In the context of a 2-group experimental design, error consistency was examined via 5 repetitions of 30 multisyllabic words. The influence of error rate, severity of impairment, and stimulus presentation condition (blocked vs. random) on error consistency was also explored, as well as between-groups differences in the types of errors produced. Results: Groups performed similarly on consistency of error location; however, adults with AOS demonstrated greater variability of error type in a blocked presentation condition only. Stimulus presentation condition, error rate, and severity of impairment did not influence error consistency in either group. Groups differed in the production of phonetic errors (e.g., sound distortions) but not phonemic errors. Conclusions: Overall, findings do not support relatively consistent errors as a differentiating characteristic of AOS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology is the property of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	Purpose: The primary characteristics used to define acquired apraxia of speech (AOS) have evolved to better reflect a disorder of motor planning/programming. However, there is debate regarding the feature of relatively consistent error location and type. Method: Ten individuals with acquired AOS and aphasia and 11 individuals with aphasia without AOS participated in this study. In the context of a 2-group experimental design, error consistency was examined via 5 repetitions of 30 multisyllabic words. The influence of error rate, severity of impairment, and stimulus presentation condition (blocked vs. random) on error consistency was also explored, as well as between-groups differences in the types of errors produced. Results: Groups performed similarly on consistency of error location; however, adults with AOS demonstrated greater variability of error type in a blocked presentation condition only. Stimulus presentation condition, error rate, and severity of impairment did not influence error consistency in either group. Groups differed in the production of phonetic errors (e.g., sound distortions) but not phonemic errors. Conclusions: Overall, findings do not support relatively consistent errors as a differentiating characteristic of AOS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	10580360
DOI:	10.1044/2017_AJSLP-16-0080