Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study highlights the importance of quantitatively evaluating conversation turns (CTs) and speaking roles (SRs) in dyadic conversations between Mandarin-Chinese-speaking older adults with dementia (OADs) and healthy older adults (HOAs). Evaluating CTs and SRs provides comprehensive insights into how conversation processes and content are collaboratively co-constructed. Four mutually familiar dyads, each consisting of one OAD and one HOA, participated in five weekly 10-min conversations. Results revealed asymmetrical contributions in CTs, with HOAs assuming significantly more CTs to facilitate the conversation, but symmetrical contributions in SRs, indicating balanced involvement from both groups in shaping content. HOAs frequently took obligatory and nonobligatory CTs as the Animator or Author, supporting OADs in engaging meaningfully as the Author or Principal. These conversational behaviors reflect cultural values prevalent among Mandarin Chinese speakers, such as modesty, loyalty, and solidarity. Thus, integrating CT and SR evaluations provides valuable insights into conversational co-construction, particularly critical in dementia conversation research. However, findings are context-specific and culturally influenced and require cautious interpretation. In future research, these evaluative tools should be expanded to diverse populations and conversational contexts to enhance understanding of conversational dynamics across different cultures.

Keywords

conversation Mandarin Chinese older adults dementia conversation turns speaking roles

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amspoker

A. B.

Lynn Snow

Renn

B. N.

Block

Pickens

Morgan

R. O.

Kunik

M. E.

(2021). Patient versus informal caregiver proxy reports of pain interference in persons with dementia. Journal of Applied Gerontology: The Official Journal of the Southern Gerontological Society, 40(4), 414–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464820902632

Atay

Conway

E. R.

Angus

Wiles

Baker

Chenery

H. J.

(2015). An automated approach to examining conversational dynamics between people with dementia and their carers. PLoS One, 10(12), e0144327. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0144327

Azios

J. H.

Archer

Lee

J. B.

(2021). Detecting behavioural change in conversation: Procedures and preliminary data. Aphasiology, 35(7), 961–983. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2020.1812031

Baker

Angus

Smith-Conway

E. R.

Baker

K. S.

Gallois

Smith

Wiles

Chenery

H. J.

(2015). Visualising conversations between care home staff and residents with dementia. Ageing and Society, 35(2), 270–297. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X13000640

Bloch

Wilkinson

(2004). The understandability of AAC: A conversation analysis study of acquired dysarthria. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20(4), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610400005614

Boles

Todd

(1998). Conversational discourse analysis: Appropriate and useful sample sizes. Aphasiology, 12(7-8), 547–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687039808249557

Bressan

Visintini

Palese

(2020). What do family caregivers of people with dementia need? A mixed-method systematic review. Health and Social Care in the Community, 28(6), 1942–1960. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13048

Buder

E. H.

(1991). A nonlinear dynamic model of social interaction. Communication Research, 18(2), 174–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365091018002003

Carey

Cameron

Mansfield

Sanson-Fisher

(2023). Perceptions of people living with dementia regarding patient-centred aspects of their care and caregiver support. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 42(1), 246–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajag.13156

10.

Chang

W. S.

Tsai

M.-Ju

(2023). The effect of familiarity on conversation turns in dyadic conversation among Chinese older adults. Sage Open, 13(2), Article 21582440231169630. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231169630

11.

Clarke

M. T.

Wilkinson

(2007). Interaction between children with cerebral palsy and their peers 1: Organizing and understanding VOCA use. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23(4), 336–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610701390350

12.

Cohen's

(1988). The arcsine transformation and the effect size index. In Cohen

(Ed.), Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (pp. 180–185). Lawrence Erlbaum.

13.

Conway

E. R.

Chenery

H. J.

(2016). Evaluating the MESSAGE communication strategies in dementia training for use with community-based aged care staff working with people with dementia: A controlled pretest–post-test study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25(7-8), 1145–1155. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13134

14.

Culpeper

Gillings

(2019). Pragmatics: Data trends. Journal of Pragmatics, 145, 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.004

15.

Department of Statistics (2021). Population and housing census general statistical analysis report. Ministry of Interior, Taiwan.

16.

Dijkstra

Bourgeois

M. S.

Allen

R. S.

Burgio

L. D.

(2004). Conversational coherence: Discourse analysis of older adults with and without dementia. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17(4), 263–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0911-6044(03)00048-4. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0911604403000484

17.

Fetzer

Akman

(2002). Contexts of social action: Guest editors' introduction. Language & Communication, 22(4), 391–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0271-5309(02)00016-2

18.

Goffman

(1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Lebanon, NH. Northeastern University Press.

19.

Goffman

(1981). Forms of talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.

20.

Guralnick

M. J.

Paul-Brown

(1989). Peer-related communicative competence of preschool children: Developmental and adaptive characteristics. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 32(4), 930–943. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3204.930. https://jslhr.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/32/4/930

21.

Hadley

L. V.

Brimijoin

W. O.

Whitmer

W. M.

(2019). Speech, movement, and gaze behaviours during dyadic conversation in noise. Scientific Reports, 9(1), Article 10451. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-46416-0

22.

Hadley

L. V.

Whitmer

Brimijoin

W. O.

Naylor

(2021). Conversation in small groups: Speaking and listening strategies depend on the complexities of the environment and group. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 28(2), 632–640. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01821-9

23.

Higginbotham

D. J.

Kim

K.-E.

Scally

(2007). The effect of the communication output method on augmented interaction. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23(2), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610601045344

24.

Hirvenkari

Ruusuvuori

Saarinen

V.-M.

Kivioja

Peräkylä

Hari

(2013). Influence of turn-taking in a two-person conversation on the gaze of a viewer. PLoS One, 8(8), Article e71569. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071569

25.

Kindell

Keady

Sage

Wilkinson

(2017). Everyday conversation in dementia: A review of the literature to inform research and practice. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 52(4), 392–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12298

26.

Kindell

Wilkinson

Keady

(2019). From conversation to connection: A cross-case analysis of life-story work with five couples where one partner has semantic dementia. Ageing and Society, 39(10), 2322–2345. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X18000533

27.

Kistner

Marshall

Dipper

L. T.

(2020). The influence of conversation parameters on gesture production in aphasia. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 34(8), 693–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2019.1692075

28.

Lai

(2014). Discourse features of chinese-speaking seniors with and without alzheimer’s disease. Language and Linguistics, 15(3), 411–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/1606822x14520665

29.

Leahy

M. M.

(2004). Therapy talk: Analyzing therapeutic discourse. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 35(1), 70–81. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2004/008). https://lshss.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/35/1/70

30.

Leaman

M. C.

Edmonds

L. A.

(2019). Conversation in aphasia across communication partners: Exploring stability of microlinguistic measures and communicative success. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 28(1S), 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0148

31.

Lee

C.-W.

Y.-L.

L.-C.

(2019). Combining mutual information and entropy for unknown word extraction from multilingual code-switching sentences. Journal of Information Science and Engineering, 35(3), 597–610. https://doi.org/10.6688/jise.201905_35(3).0007

32.

H. Z.

(2001). Cooperative and intrusive interruptions in inter-and intracultural dyadic discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 20(3), 259–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x01020003001

33.

(2014). Leaning and recipient intervening questions in Mandarin conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 67, 34–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.03.011

34.

(2021). Ethnic disparities in labor market outcomes among migrant populations in China: A study of thirteen minority groups and the Han. Chinese Sociological Review, 53(3), 285–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/21620555.2020.1817733

35.

Liu

Y.-C.

Liu

Y.-Y.

Yip

P.-K.

Meguro

(2017). Speaking one more language in early life has only minor effects on cognition in Taiwanese with low education level: The Taishan project. Psychogeriatrics: The Official Journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society, 17(4), 256–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyg.12230

36.

Mackenzie

(2000). Adult spoken discourse: The influences of age and education. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 35(2), 269–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/136828200247188

37.

Mara

C. A.

Cribbie

R. A.

(2012). Paired-samples tests of equivalence. Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation, 41(10), 1928–1943. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2011.626545

38.

McMillan

J. H.

Schumacher

(2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry, myEducationlab series. (7th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.

39.

McTear

King

(1991). Miscommunication in clinical contexts: The speech therapy interview. In Coupland

Giles

Wiemann

J. M.

(Eds.), Miscommunication and problematic talk (pp. 195–214). Sage Publications.

40.

Ministry of Health and Welfare [MOHW] . (2020). Dementia prevention and care policy statement and action plan 2.0. Ministry of Health and Welfare. https://www.mohw.gov.tw/dl-65821-4f228a39-c60e-4399-9a97-dbf59d6b6041.html

41.

Ministry of Health and Welfare [MOHW] . (2022). News room year 2022. Ministry of Health and Welfare. https://www.mohw.gov.tw/cp-5271-71075-1.html

42.

Ministry of the Interior [MOI] . (2024). 2024 week 44 monthly bulletin of interior statistics. Ministry of the Interior [MOI]. https://www.moi.gov.tw/files/site_node_file/7635/week10715.pdf

43.

Mondada

(2019). Contemporary issues in conversation analysis: Embodiment and materiality, multimodality and multisensoriality in social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 145(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.016

44.

Muller

Soto

(2002). Conversation patterns of three adults using aided speech: Variations across partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(2), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610212331281181

45.

Nefkens

O.-

Wlj

Derksen

E. W. C.

Debets

de Swart

B. J. M.

Maria WG Nijhuis-van der Sanden Kalf

J. G.

(2022). Com-mens: A home-based logopaedic intervention program for communication problems between people with dementia and their caregivers—a single-group mixed-methods pilot study. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 58(3), 704–722. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12811

46.

Nickbakht

Angwin

A. J.

Cheng

B. B. Y.

Liddle

Worthy

Wiles

J. H.

Angus

Wallace

S. J.

(2023). Putting “the broken bits together”: A qualitative exploration of the impact of communication changes in dementia. Journal of Communication Disorders, 101(1), Article 106294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2022.106294

47.

Norén

Samuelsson

Plejert

(2013). Aided communication in dialogical perspectives: Augmentative and alternative communication as action and participation within embodied social worlds. J & R Press.

48.

Olswang

L. B.

Svensson

Coggins

T. E.

Beilinson

J. S.

Donaldson

A. L.

(2006). Reliability issues and solutions for coding social communication performance in classroom settings. Journal of Speech Language Hearing Research: Journal of Speech Language Hearing Research, 49(5), 1058–1071. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2006/075)

49.

Patten

M. L.

(2007). Understanding research methods: An overview of the essentials (6th ed.). Pyrczak Publishing.

50.

Pham

T. V.

Jimenez

C. R.

(2012). An accurate paired sample test for count data. Bioinformatics, 28(18), i596–i602. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts394

51.

Portney

L. G.

Watkins

M. P.

(2000). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall-Health.

52.

Purves

B. A.

Phinney

(2012). Family voices: A family systems approach to understanding communication in dementia. Canadian Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 36(4), 284–300.

53.

Schieffelin

B. B.

Ochs

(1986). Language socialization. Annual Review of Anthropology, 15(1), 163–191. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.15.1.163

54.

Shannon

Bail

Neville

(2019). Dementia-friendly community initiatives: An integrative review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 28(11-12), 2035–2045. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14746

55.

Simmons-Mackie

N. N.

Kingston

Schultz

(2004). “Speaking for another”: The management of participant frames in aphasia. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 13(2), 114–127. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2004/013)

56.

Skantze

(2021). Turn-taking in conversational systems and human-robot interaction: A review. Computer Speech & Language, 67(1), Article 101178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csl.2020.101178

57.

Sluis

R. A.

Angus

Wiles

Back

Gibson

Liddle

Worthy

Copland

Angwin

A. J.

(2020). An automated approach to examining pausing in the speech of people with dementia. American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias, 35(1), Article 1533317520939773. https://doi.org/10.1177/1533317520939773

58.

Söderlund

Cronqvist

Norberg

Hansebo

(2016). Conversations between persons with dementia disease living in nursing homes and nurses–qualitative evaluation of an intervention with the validation method. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 30(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12219

59.

Soto

Clarke

M. T.

(2017). Effects of a conversation-based intervention on the linguistic skills of children with motor speech disorders who use augmentative and alternative communication. Journal of Speech Language Hearing Research: Journal of Speech Language Hearing Research, 60(7), 1980–1998. https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_JSLHR-L-15-0246

60.

Stiegler

L. N.

(2007). Discovering communicative competencies in a nonspeaking child with autism. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38(4), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2007/041). https://lshss.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/38/4/400

61.

Stuart

L. B.

Jones

C. H.

Gill

(2022). A qualitative systematic review of the role of families in supporting communication in people with dementia. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 57(5), 1130–1153. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12738

62.

Tsai

M.-J.

(2013). The effect of familiarity of conversation partners on conversation turns contributed by augmented and typical speakers. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(8), 2326–2335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2013.04.014

63.

Tsai

M.-J.

(2023). Dyadic conversation between mandarin-chinese-speaking healthy older adults: From analyses of conversation turns and speaking roles. Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 134. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13020134

64.

Tsai

M.-J.

Chih

Y.-C.

(2022). Conversation turns and speaking roles contributed by Mandarin Chinese dyadic conversations between adults who use speech-generating devices and adults who use natural speech. Assistive technology: The Official Journal of RESNA, 34(5), 563–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2021.1893234

65.

Tsai

M.-J.

Scherz

DiLollo

(2011). Conversation of augmented and typical speakers—Speaking roles versus conversation turns. Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing, 14(4), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1179/jslh.2011.14.4.179

66.

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

67.

Turkstra

L. S.

Ciccia

Seaton

(2003). Interactive behaviors in adolescent conversation dyads. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 34(2), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2003/010)

68.

Wiemann

J. M.

(1981). Effects of laboratory videotaping procedures on selected conversation behaviors. Human Communication Research, 7(4), 302–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1981.tb00577.x

69.

World Health Organization [WHO] . (2023). Dementia. World Health Organization [WHO]. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dementia (Accessed April 19th).

70.

R.-J. R.

(2011). A conversation analysis of self-praising in everyday Mandarin interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(13), 3152–3176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.016

71.

Xiao

Y. H.

J. X.

(2022). A conversational analysis of aging in China from a cross-section of the labour market: A corpus-based study. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01387-y.<GotoISI>://WOS:000869244500002

72.

Yoon

Chan

Hung

W.K.

Ying

Lam

W. W. T.

(2015). Communicative characteristics of interactions between surgeons and Chinese women with breast cancer in oncology consultation: A conversation analysis. Health Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 18(6), 2825–2840. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12260

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.34 MB

Evaluating Co-construction in Dyadic Conversations: A Pilot Study on Older Adults with Dementia and Healthy Older Adults in Taiwan

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material