Using Theatrical Practices as a Modality within an Intervention Plan for the Communication Impairment of Aphasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the practice of theatre, actors communicate with the audience by both verbal and non verbal means. Commonly misunderstood as a comprehensive communication disorder, aphasia is a diagnosis given when the language center of the brain is damaged. Individuals with aphasia have trouble either understanding language, generating language, or both. Language, however, does not encompass the myriad of ways that humans are able to communicate. Actors explore these alternative communication strategies in multiple divergent forms of theatrical practices. This dissertation examines the ways that theatrical practices (primarily informed by the works of Augusto Boal) can be used to enhance the communicative abilities of individuals with aphasia through disrupting the perceived superiority of verbal communication over nonverbal communication. Outlined in this work are six unique interventions created for individuals with aphasia that use theatrical practices as a modality within treatment. These interventions are: (1) Théâtre Aphasique in Montreal; (2) The Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago’s Waiting on the Words; (3) The Adler Aphasia Center Drama Club in New Jersey; (4) Laura Wood’s and David Mower’s Co-Active Therapeutic Theatre Model; (5) CU Boulder’s Speech Language and Hearing Clinic’s The Wizard of Oz, and finally (6) their subsequent production of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Ultimately, this research confirms the efficacy of theatrical practices in assisting individuals with aphasia to increase their communication confidence and subsequently their quality of life. Additionally, this dissertation identifies significant areas of overlap betweenthe communication goals of speech-language pathology and the communication outcomes of theatrical practices. As such, this research suggests the need for further study from both speech-language pathologists and theatrical practitioners in utilizing this modality of intervention for individuals with aphasia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".