Search

The present multiple case study investigates the production of compound words in three Greek-speaking individuals with agrammatism, as a symptom either of stroke-induced aphasia or Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA). Two off-line tasks were conducted, a picture naming and a production by definition task , using different types of compounds, in order to examine patients' ability to produce complex morphological structures and the impact of specific compound properties. Results showed that all patients’ performance was significantly more impaired compared to healthy controls. Qualitative analysis revealed different error patterns for each pathological condition, suggesting that agrammatism in stroke-induced and primary progressive aphasia does not necessarily result in the same deficits when it comes to morphological processing. Moreover, heterogeneous results emerged for the two PPA patients which further highlight the progressive nature of PPA as a crucial factor in complex word retrieval. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Interactions between patients suffering from medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) and their physicians are usually perceived as difficult and unsatisfactory by both parties. In this qualitative study, patients’ reactions to psychosomatic attributions were analyzed on a micro-level. Methods: 144 consultations between consultation-and-liaison (CL) psychotherapists and inpatients with MUS, who were treated according to a modified reattribution model, were recorded. Linguists and psychologists evaluated these consultations by applying conversation and positioning analysis. Results: When introducing a psychosomatic attribution, therapists use discursive strategies to exert interactional pressure on the patient; while simultaneously using careful and implicit formulations. Three linguistic patterns could be found in which patients subtly refute, drop or undermine the psychosomatic attribution in their reply. Moreover, in this context patients position themselves as somatically ill or justify their own life situation. Conclusion: The results suggest that patients interpret psychosomatic attributions and even subtle suggestions from the psychotherapists as face-threatening ‘other-positionings’. Practice implications: When implementing the reattribution model, it should be taken into account that interactional resistance might be a necessary step in the process of the patient's understanding. Nevertheless therapists should introduce reattribution in a patient-centered rather than persuasive way and they should openly address patients’ fears of being stigmatized. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]