{"title":"Applying linguistic demand analysis to functional multitasking assessments.","authors":"Jacqueline Hinckley, Rita Lenhardt, Aisha Gaziani, Angela Merlino","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2075747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The linguistic demand of task instructions in cognitive assessments may mask or even invalidate cognitive testing results for individuals with language differences or impairments. The purpose of this study was to apply an analysis of linguistic demand to a sample of functional multitasking assessments.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We sampled the task instructions and materials from seven functional multitasking assessments that are based on everyday activities. We calculated indices of linguistic demand.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Density Index is based on total number of words, total number of sentences, total number of different words, total number of syllables, and complex (not-simple) sentences. The Breakfast Task and the Frisch Cooking Task consistently ranked lowest in linguistic demand for both instructions and materials based on the indices reviewed. These tasks are most likely to be appropriate for individuals with language impairment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinicians have a responsibility to fairly evaluate cognitive functions of individuals with impaired language functioning. The analysis of linguistic demand provides a useful way to evaluate task instructions and materials in a systematic way, so that individuals with language impairments or language differences might be more appropriately evaluated.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2075747","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/5/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The linguistic demand of task instructions in cognitive assessments may mask or even invalidate cognitive testing results for individuals with language differences or impairments. The purpose of this study was to apply an analysis of linguistic demand to a sample of functional multitasking assessments.
Method: We sampled the task instructions and materials from seven functional multitasking assessments that are based on everyday activities. We calculated indices of linguistic demand.
Results: The Density Index is based on total number of words, total number of sentences, total number of different words, total number of syllables, and complex (not-simple) sentences. The Breakfast Task and the Frisch Cooking Task consistently ranked lowest in linguistic demand for both instructions and materials based on the indices reviewed. These tasks are most likely to be appropriate for individuals with language impairment.
Conclusions: Clinicians have a responsibility to fairly evaluate cognitive functions of individuals with impaired language functioning. The analysis of linguistic demand provides a useful way to evaluate task instructions and materials in a systematic way, so that individuals with language impairments or language differences might be more appropriately evaluated.
期刊介绍:
pplied Neuropsychology-Adult publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in adults. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of adult patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.