Predicting discourse ability in TBI: Cognitive and communicative factors

预测 TBI 中的话语能力：认知和沟通因素

• 批准号: 8459791
• 负责人: Karen Le
• 金额: $ 4.22万
• 依托单位: UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT STORRS
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 财政年份: 2012
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2012-08-28 至 2014-08-27
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://reporter.nih.gov/project-details/8459791
• 关键词: Accounting; Adopted; Area; Brain; Clinical; Cognitive; Communication impairment; Complex; Comprehension; Data; Dependence; Development; Dimensions; Equation; Event; Foundations; Goals; Impairment; Individual; Influentials; Intervention; Knowledge; Language; Linguistics; Link; Literature; Marshal; Measures; Memory; Modality; Modeling; Neurologic; Outcome Measure; Participant; Performance; Population; Process; Production; Refit; Research; Resources; Role; Short-Term Memory; Solid; Structure; System; Testing; Traumatic Brain Injury; Update; Work; base; executive function; injured; insight; mental representation; skills; theories

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The goal of the proposed research is to advance our knowledge of cognitive-communicative disorders following traumatic brain injury (TBI) by identifying the cognitive and communicative processes underlying narrative discourse ability. Using structural equation modeling, the proposed research will examine the role of working memory (WM) and inferencing in narrative discourse and test key assumptions posited by the Structure Building Framework (SBF), a cognitive model of normative discourse comprehension. Aspects of executive functions, such as WM, have emerged as potential substrates of discourse. A related factor is inferencing, an often diminished ability in TBI. Discourse production deficits are well-documented in the TBI literature, but data on discourse comprehension in TBI is scarce. The extent to which discourse comprehension predicts discourse production remains unclear. The lack of a discourse model to explain cognitive-communicative breakdowns in neurologic populations hinders the development of theoretically-based discourse interventions. The SBF is a potential candidate, but its assumptions need to be tested, in particular the positing of deployed cognitive processes as domain-general. First, we examine the contributions of WM and inferencing to narrative discourse ability. Second, we test the hypothesis that discourse relies on domain- general processes by using verbal and nonverbal WM tasks. Third, we investigate the extent to which narrative discourse comprehension accounts for narrative discourse production. Analysis 1 uses verbal and nonverbal WM updating and inferencing tasks to predict performance on two narrative discourse comprehension tasks. Analysis 2 uses the same predictors as Analysis 1 to predict performance on two discourse production tasks, story completeness and story grammar. The literature suggests that WM underpins both discourse modes. If WM is domain-general in discourse, we predict that verbal WM will not account for discourse comprehension beyond that of nonverbal WM and vice versa. This hypothesis will hold if performance on verbal and nonverbal WM is highly correlated and the amount of variance in discourse tasks explained by the verbal and nonverbal WM is equivalent. If inferencing contributes to discourse ability after accounting for WM, this suggests that inferencing also marshals other cognitive processes. In Analysis 2, we predict that WM will carry more of the variance in the content measure, story completeness, than inferencing whereas inferencing will carry more of the variance in the organizational measure, story grammar. Analysis 3 examines the prediction of discourse production from discourse comprehension. The magnitude of the contribution of discourse comprehension to discourse production reflects the dependence of production on comprehension. A greater magnitude of the relationship implicates that discourse production and comprehension likely operate in the same system while a smaller one would suggest that comprehension and production operate as parallel systems that draw upon the same cognitive processes but to differing degrees. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: The proposed research will contribute to our knowledge of cognitive-communicative disorders following traumatic brain injury by identifying the cognitive and communicative processes underlying discourse ability. The findings from this study will be instrumental in refitting current models of discourse or in developing new ones to better explain cognitive-communicative functioning in neurologic populations. A working model of discourse ability will provide a solid foundation for the development of meaningful and targeted discourse interventions grounded in theory.

描述（由申请人提供）：本研究的目标是通过识别叙事话语能力背后的认知和交际过程，提高我们对创伤性脑损伤（TBI）后认知交际障碍的认识。利用结构方程模型，本研究将考察工作记忆（WM）和推理在叙事话语中的作用，并检验结构构建框架（SBF）这一规范性话语理解的认知模型所提出的关键假设。执行功能的各个方面，如WM，已经成为语篇的潜在基础。一个相关的因素是推理，这是创伤性脑损伤患者经常下降的能力。语篇产生缺陷在TBI文献中有很好的记录，但关于TBI中语篇理解的数据很少。语篇理解在多大程度上预测语篇生产仍不清楚。缺乏话语模型来解释神经系统人群的认知交际障碍，阻碍了基于理论的话语干预的发展。SBF是一个潜在的候选，但它的假设需要测试，特别是部署认知过程作为领域一般的假设。首先，我们考察了WM和推理对叙事话语能力的贡献。其次，我们通过使用言语和非言语WM任务来检验话语依赖领域一般过程的假设。第三，我们考察了叙事话语理解对叙事话语生产的影响程度。分析1使用言语和非言语WM更新和推理任务来预测两个叙事话语理解任务的表现。分析2使用与分析1相同的预测因子来预测两项话语生成任务（故事完整性和故事语法）的表现。文献表明，WM是两种话语模式的基础。如果WM在语篇中是域通用性的，我们预测言语WM在非言语WM之外不会对语篇理解产生影响，反之亦然。如果言语交际和非言语交际的表现是高度相关的，并且言语交际和非言语交际所解释的话语任务的变异量是相等的，那么这个假设就成立。如果推理在考虑WM后有助于话语能力，这表明推理也对其他认知过程进行了整理。在分析2中，我们预测WM将在内容度量（故事完整性）中携带比推理更多的方差，而推理将在组织度量（故事语法）中携带更多的方差。分析3从语篇理解的角度考察语篇生产的预测。话语理解对话语生产的贡献大小反映了话语生产对理解的依赖性。更大的关系意味着话语产生和理解可能在同一个系统中运作，而较小的关系则表明理解和产生作为平行系统运作，它们利用相同的认知过程，但程度不同。