DeLong, Catharine and Nessler, Christina and Brunsvold, Jessica and Wambaugh, Julie L. (2014) Semantic Feature Analysis: Further Examination of Outcomes. [Clinical Aphasiology Paper]
PDF
498-904-1-RV(DeLong-Nessler-Brunsvold).pdf Download (191kB) |
Abstract
Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) has received considerable study over the past two decades as a word-retrieval treatment for aphasia (Boyle & Coelho, 1995; Lowell, Beeson, & Holland, 1995; Boyle, 2010; Wambaugh, Mauszycki, Cameron, Wright, & Nessler, 2013). SFA has been shown to have consistently positive acquisition effects (i.e., improvement of trained items), with generally positive but less predictable generalization effects (i.e., improvement in untrained items). SFA was originally designed as a cognitive treatment for children and adolescents sustaining traumatic brain injury (TBI) (Haarbauer-Krupa, Moser, Smith, Sullivan & Szekeres, 1985). The therapy was designed as an “organizing process for thinking and verbal expression” (p.303). Massaro and Tompkins (1994) operationalized SFA in a study with two participants with TBI. In keeping with the intentions of the original developers, Massaro and Tompkins measured SFA’s treatment effects in terms of increased production of semantically relevant content. In the treatment of aphasia, the focus of SFA relative to outcomes has been naming accuracy. That is, SFA has been used as a means of systematically stimulating semantic networks to facilitate naming. Additionally, SFA has been considered to potentially serve as a mediating strategy for self-cuing accurate naming and/or a compensatory strategy for circumventing word-retrieval difficulties. The current study was designed to elucidate the effects of SFA in aphasia treatment beyond naming accuracy. Given SFA was designed to improve verbal expression in general and may serve as a compensatory strategy, increased production of relevant content was of interest (after Tompkins & Massaro, 1994). In light of inconsistent generalization effects associated with SFA, the study was designed to explore its generalization effects relative to aspects of untreated items. Specifically, untreated items were controlled in terms of semantic relatedness, exposure in probing, and knowledge of phonological form.
Item Type: | Clinical Aphasiology Paper |
---|---|
Depositing User: | Leo Johnson |
Date Deposited: | 17 Jun 2015 |
Last Modified: | 31 Oct 2016 15:13 |
Conference: | Clinical Aphasiology Conference > Clinical Aphasiology Conference (2014 : 44th : St. Simons Island, GA : May 27-June 1, 2014 |
URI: | http://aphasiology.pitt.edu/id/eprint/2549 |
Actions (login required)
View Item |