Seven response categories, devised for the concurrent evaluation of aphasic speech, were investigated for their reliability. The spontaneous speech of 5 aphasic subjects was rated on-line by 4 clinicians using 7 response categories. Agreement among the 4 judges, for both inter-judge and intra-judge reliability, varied for each subject and was not high enough to support the concurrent use of the seven response categories for the on-line investigation of aphasic speech in all subjects. Ways in which the reliability of the categories might be increased are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GoodglassH.QuadfaselF. A.TimberlakeW. H.Phrase length and the type and severity of aphasia. Cortex, 1964, 1, 133–153.
2.
GoodkinR.Case studies in behavioral research in rehabilitation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 23, 171–182.
3.
GoodkinR.Use of concurrent response categories in evaluating talking behavior in aphasic patients. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1968, 26, 1035–1040.
4.
GoodkinR.Changes in word production, sentence production and relevance in an aphasic through verbal conditioning. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 1969, 7, 93–99.
5.
GoodkinR.DillerL.ShahN.Training spouses to improve the functional speech of aphasic patients. In LaheyB. (Ed.), The modification of language behavior. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1973. Pp. 218–269.
6.
PackmanA.InghamR. J.Contingency management in the treatment of adult aphasia: A review. Australian Journal of Human Communication Disorders, 1977, 5, 110–118.
7.
PorchB. E.Porch index of communicative ability. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1967.
8.
SchuellH.Minnesota test for differential diagnosis of aphasia. Minneapolis, Minn.: Univer. of Minnesota Press, 1965.
9.
SiegelS.Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
