Difference between revisions of "Mikesell-Bromley2016"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Lisa Mikesell; Elizabeth Bromley |Title=Exploring the Heterogeneity of ‘Schizophrenic Speech’ |Editor(s)=Jessica Nina Lester;...")
 
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
 
|Author(s)=Lisa Mikesell; Elizabeth Bromley
 
|Author(s)=Lisa Mikesell; Elizabeth Bromley
|Title=Exploring the Heterogeneity of ‘Schizophrenic Speech’
+
|Title=Exploring the heterogeneity of ‘schizophrenic speech’
 
+
|Editor(s)=Jessica Nina Lester; Michelle O'Reilly;
|Editor(s)=Jessica Nina Lester; Michelle O'Reilly;  
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Schizophrenia; Mental Health;
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Schizophrenia; Mental Health;  
 
 
|Key=Mikesell-Bromley2016
 
|Key=Mikesell-Bromley2016
 +
|Publisher=Palgrave Macmillan
 
|Year=2016
 
|Year=2016
 +
|Language=English
 +
|Address=London
 
|Booktitle=The Palgrave Handbook of Adult Mental Health
 
|Booktitle=The Palgrave Handbook of Adult Mental Health
 
|Pages=329-351
 
|Pages=329-351
Line 13: Line 15:
 
|DOI=10.1057/9781137496850_18
 
|DOI=10.1057/9781137496850_18
 
|Abstract=Despite claims that pragmatic impairment is a defining feature of schizophrenia (Covington et al., 2005), few studies explore the communication practices of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia (IwS) in spontaneous interactions where pragmatic impairment may come to the fore. A number of linguistic deficits have been identified (Fraser, King, & Thomas, 1986; Hoffman & Sledge, 1988), but many studies examine language features de-contextualised from their interactional environment. Such an approach allows quantification of isolated, well-defined features but may mask how language use impacts functional outcomes and defines interactional moments, a gap which has led to somewhat mechanistic descriptions of ‘schizophrenic speech’. Although not all IwS exhibit problematic speech patterns, it is often clinically presumed that language is disordered, reflecting a disturbance in cognition or thought processes (Bleuler, 1911/1950). Clinicians thus often pay attention to related categories of pathology rather than to whether the language or discourse practices are communicative. As a result, the situational complexities of language behaviour may be overlooked.
 
|Abstract=Despite claims that pragmatic impairment is a defining feature of schizophrenia (Covington et al., 2005), few studies explore the communication practices of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia (IwS) in spontaneous interactions where pragmatic impairment may come to the fore. A number of linguistic deficits have been identified (Fraser, King, & Thomas, 1986; Hoffman & Sledge, 1988), but many studies examine language features de-contextualised from their interactional environment. Such an approach allows quantification of isolated, well-defined features but may mask how language use impacts functional outcomes and defines interactional moments, a gap which has led to somewhat mechanistic descriptions of ‘schizophrenic speech’. Although not all IwS exhibit problematic speech patterns, it is often clinically presumed that language is disordered, reflecting a disturbance in cognition or thought processes (Bleuler, 1911/1950). Clinicians thus often pay attention to related categories of pathology rather than to whether the language or discourse practices are communicative. As a result, the situational complexities of language behaviour may be overlooked.
 
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 12:03, 25 December 2019

Mikesell-Bromley2016
BibType INCOLLECTION
Key Mikesell-Bromley2016
Author(s) Lisa Mikesell, Elizabeth Bromley
Title Exploring the heterogeneity of ‘schizophrenic speech’
Editor(s) Jessica Nina Lester, Michelle O'Reilly
Tag(s) EMCA, Schizophrenia, Mental Health
Publisher Palgrave Macmillan
Year 2016
Language English
City London
Month
Journal
Volume
Number
Pages 329-351
URL Link
DOI 10.1057/9781137496850_18
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title The Palgrave Handbook of Adult Mental Health
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Despite claims that pragmatic impairment is a defining feature of schizophrenia (Covington et al., 2005), few studies explore the communication practices of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia (IwS) in spontaneous interactions where pragmatic impairment may come to the fore. A number of linguistic deficits have been identified (Fraser, King, & Thomas, 1986; Hoffman & Sledge, 1988), but many studies examine language features de-contextualised from their interactional environment. Such an approach allows quantification of isolated, well-defined features but may mask how language use impacts functional outcomes and defines interactional moments, a gap which has led to somewhat mechanistic descriptions of ‘schizophrenic speech’. Although not all IwS exhibit problematic speech patterns, it is often clinically presumed that language is disordered, reflecting a disturbance in cognition or thought processes (Bleuler, 1911/1950). Clinicians thus often pay attention to related categories of pathology rather than to whether the language or discourse practices are communicative. As a result, the situational complexities of language behaviour may be overlooked.

Notes