Citation

Johnson DM, Dixon DR, Coon RC, Hilker K, Gouvier WD. Appl. Neuropsychol. 2002; 9(1): 58-62.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge 70803-5501, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2002, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1207/S15324826AN0901_7

PMID

12173751

Abstract

Previous research has shown that both prosodic and content variations in speech register are important when addressing all individuals. Motherese speech register has been associated with higher levels of perceived disability and is viewed more negatively by individuals with a history of head injury. This research was conducted to investigate the separate contributions of content and prosody in producing differential response to speech by individuals with and without a history of head injury. Participants included 210 introductory psychology students with and without head injuries. No significant demographic differences were found between these groups. Participants listened to 4 sets of audiotaped instructions from afictitious home economics teacher containing prosodic and content variations. Afterward, they rated the teacher on the following dimensions: liking, positive impact, negative impact, grade level being taught, and whether they would recommend hiring this teacher. Analysis of variance revealed there were no significant group differences between participants rating with normal speech. As expected, both groups favored the normal speech register over motherese. However, the group with head injuries consistently rated the speech with motherese content as more negative, less likable, less likely to hire, and aimed at a lower grade level. Participants with head injuries also rated the speech register with motherese prosody as less likable and less likely to hire. These results suggest that when addressing individuals with head injuries, both what you say and how you say it are important.

Language: en