FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2038466066> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2038466066 endingPage "393" @default.
• W2038466066 startingPage "375" @default.
• W2038466066 abstract "Background: The analysis of discourse has now become commonplace but the focus continues to be on discrete aspects or levels of discourse processing. Although this has provided the necessary groundwork, investigating the relationships and interconnections between these levels continues to be stressed. Recently, some studies have formulated multi‐level discourse‐processing theories and models that explain these inter‐relationships and that identify the sub‐processes involved in producing discourse. This study has used one such model to analyse different levels of discourse and investigate the interconnections between them. Aims: To assess the applicability and utility of using a multi‐level discourse‐processing model to examine the interaction between levels of discourse produced by individuals without brain damage. Methods & Procedures: A total of 14 narrative and procedural discourse samples were elicited from 32 non‐brain‐damaged males of different ages and socioeconomic status groups, yielding a total of 394 samples. These samples were analysed in terms of seven broad features (comprising 23 measures), relating to the levels of the multi‐level discourse model. The correlations between these measures were determined using the Spearman's rho correlation test. Outcomes & Results: From the clustering of correlations, a number of fruitful relationships were revealed. Greater relevance was related to more appropriate discourse grammar as well as greater cohesion and syntactic complexity. Longer samples were correlated with an increased proportion of cohesive ties, cohesive errors, and syntactic complexity. An increase in non‐specific elements was related to reduced syntactic complexity and cohesion. A higher occurrence of left‐branching clauses was associated with increased dysfluency. These correlations are explained in terms of the multi‐level discourse model. Conclusions: Three conclusions can be drawn. First, using a multi‐level discourse‐processing model can offer a more realistic perspective of discourse than the analysis of individual aspects. The differential diagnosis of relatively similar discourse impairments (e.g., following head injury, dementia, right brain damage) may ultimately rely on a comparison of the relative deficits at different levels. Second, certain discourse features that can be assessed more objectively (e.g., the number and type of conjunctions) can signal a breakdown at a more conceptual discourse level (e.g., the linking of propositions to each other at a semantic level). Third, these correlations can provide explanatory information regarding more subjective concepts that are difficult to define and measure (e.g., the perception of “relevance” relates to more structured discourse at the macro and micro level). Although this approach to discourse is challenging, it can provide a starting point for more productive investigations of discourse." @default.
• W2038466066 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2038466066 creator A5084645384 @default.
• W2038466066 date "2007-03-01" @default.
• W2038466066 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2038466066 title "Multi‐level discourse analysis: A feasible approach" @default.
• W2038466066 cites W1624817820 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W1964733135 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W1967930132 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W1971733697 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W1983317717 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W1996417979 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2002929607 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2008451738 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2022589893 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2051098087 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2061126302 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2063753762 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2071031592 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2073833363 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2083413424 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2084479752 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2086279006 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2087017553 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2088893390 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2092891720 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2134388388 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2137784142 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2163875186 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W2164258891 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W4214753206 @default.
• W2038466066 cites W4243801375 @default.
• W2038466066 doi "https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030600911435" @default.
• W2038466066 hasPublicationYear "2007" @default.
• W2038466066 type Work @default.
• W2038466066 sameAs 2038466066 @default.
• W2038466066 citedByCount "85" @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662012 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662013 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662014 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662015 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662016 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662017 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662018 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662019 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662020 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662021 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662022 @default.
• W2038466066 countsByYear W20384660662023 @default.
• W2038466066 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2038466066 hasAuthorship W2038466066A5084645384 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C104054115 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C147077947 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C149923435 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C158154518 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C178790620 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C180747234 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C199033989 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C26022165 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConcept C84389358 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C104054115 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C138885662 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C144024400 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C147077947 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C149923435 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C15744967 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C158154518 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C17744445 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C178790620 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C180747234 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C185592680 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C199033989 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C199539241 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C26022165 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C2908647359 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C41895202 @default.
• W2038466066 hasConceptScore W2038466066C84389358 @default.
• W2038466066 hasIssue "3-4" @default.
• W2038466066 hasLocation W20384660661 @default.
• W2038466066 hasOpenAccess W2038466066 @default.
• W2038466066 hasPrimaryLocation W20384660661 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W2074975542 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W2166681213 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W2352425903 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W2355037732 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W2519155136 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W2763873942 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W3082879649 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W3097211979 @default.
• W2038466066 hasRelatedWork W3212226135 @default.

• next