Acquisition and Maintenance of Scripts in Aphasia: A Comparison of Two Cuing Conditions Purpose This study was designed to compare acquisition and maintenance of scripts under two conditions: high cue, which provided numerous multimodality cues designed to minimize errors, and low cue, which provided minimal cues. Method In a randomized controlled crossover study, eight individuals with chronic aphasia received intensive computer-based script ... Supplement
Supplement  |   May 2014
Acquisition and Maintenance of Scripts in Aphasia: A Comparison of Two Cuing Conditions
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Leora R. Cherney
    Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, Center for Aphasia Research and Treatment, IL
    Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL
  • Rosalind C. Kaye
    Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, Center for Aphasia Research and Treatment, IL
  • Sarel van Vuuren
    University of Colorado, Boulder, Institute of Cognitive Science
    University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, School of Medicine, Denver
  • Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.
    Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.×
  • Correspondence to Leora R. Cherney: Lcherney@ric.org
  • Editor: Swathi Kiran
    Editor: Swathi Kiran×
  • Associate Editor: Julie Wambaugh
    Associate Editor: Julie Wambaugh×
  • © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Article Information
Language Disorders / Aphasia / Supplement: Select Papers From the 43rd Clinical Aphasiology Conference
Supplement   |   May 2014
Acquisition and Maintenance of Scripts in Aphasia: A Comparison of Two Cuing Conditions
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, May 2014, Vol. 23, S343-S360. doi:10.1044/2014_AJSLP-13-0097
History: Received August 16, 2013 , Revised December 16, 2013 , Accepted January 31, 2014
 
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, May 2014, Vol. 23, S343-S360. doi:10.1044/2014_AJSLP-13-0097
History: Received August 16, 2013; Revised December 16, 2013; Accepted January 31, 2014
Web of Science® Times Cited: 1

Purpose This study was designed to compare acquisition and maintenance of scripts under two conditions: high cue, which provided numerous multimodality cues designed to minimize errors, and low cue, which provided minimal cues.

Method In a randomized controlled crossover study, eight individuals with chronic aphasia received intensive computer-based script training under two cuing conditions. Each condition lasted 3 weeks, with a 3-week washout period. Trained and untrained scripts were probed for accuracy and rate at baseline, during treatment, immediately posttreatment, and at 3 and 6 weeks posttreatment. Significance testing was conducted on gain scores, and effect sizes were calculated.

Results Training resulted in significant gains in script acquisition with maintenance of skills at 3 and 6 weeks posttreatment. Differences between cuing conditions were not significant. When severity of aphasia was considered, there also were no significant differences between conditions, although magnitude of change was greater in the high-cue condition versus the low-cue condition for those with more severe aphasia.

Conclusions Both cuing conditions were effective in acquisition and maintenance of scripts. The high-cue condition may be advantageous for those with more severe aphasia. Findings support the clinical use of script training and the importance of considering aphasia severity.

Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, Award No. 1R01DC011754 (awarded to the first author and last author). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders or the National Institutes of Health. AphasiaScripts is a trademark of the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago. None of the authors have a financial interest in the software product.
The authors extend their thanks to Julia Carpenter, Rachel Hitch, Rosalind Hurwitz, and Jaime Lee, who collected and scored data; to Anita Halper and Audrey Holland, who served as consultants on the grant; and to Nattawut Ngampatipatpong, who modified the AphasiaScripts software for the purposes of this study.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access