05.06.2014 Views

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Queen Margaret University

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Queen Margaret University

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Queen Margaret University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

The novel stimuli were evaluated and considered to be suitable to use as new<br />

vocabulary both <strong>in</strong> word form and word mean<strong>in</strong>g and were considered<br />

‘learnable’ by the healthy adult population (prelim<strong>in</strong>ary studies one, two and<br />

four). The results <strong>of</strong> prelim<strong>in</strong>ary study three resolved the conflict between the<br />

written novel words and their spoken pronunciation, which arose for two <strong>of</strong> the<br />

word forms ‘hamek<strong>in</strong>’ and ‘junfliz’ and their pronunciation for the ma<strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigation were amended accord<strong>in</strong>gly. Participants <strong>in</strong> prelim<strong>in</strong>ary study one<br />

replicated their learn<strong>in</strong>g performance <strong>in</strong> prelim<strong>in</strong>ary study two. No practise effect<br />

was observed between prelim<strong>in</strong>ary studies one and two (although <strong>in</strong>terference<br />

was observed between the studies) – some participants improved their learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

performance, others rema<strong>in</strong>ed the same and other participants performed<br />

slightly worse. There was no overall significant difference between the two<br />

studies.<br />

Be<strong>in</strong>g unique, participants would have no memory trace <strong>of</strong> the stimuli and<br />

therefore there was no requirement for ‘untra<strong>in</strong>ed’ stimuli for control purposes.<br />

Prelim<strong>in</strong>ary studies one, two and four strongly demonstrated a wide variation <strong>in</strong><br />

the number <strong>of</strong> stimuli learned by the adult ‘normal’ population <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that a<br />

matched control population would not be appropriate for the ma<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>vestigation.<br />

The variability <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g preference (tape record<strong>in</strong>g versus face-to-face) and<br />

assessment preference (with and without visual cues) <strong>in</strong>formed the ma<strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigation to <strong>in</strong>clude a variety <strong>of</strong> procedures to assist <strong>in</strong> the facilitation <strong>of</strong><br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g and retriev<strong>in</strong>g the new vocabulary by participants <strong>in</strong> the ma<strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigation. In addition, as participants reported that they felt more<br />

comfortable memoris<strong>in</strong>g the new vocabulary alone, a period <strong>of</strong> ‘<strong>in</strong>dependent<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g time’ dur<strong>in</strong>g the ma<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>vestigation would be comb<strong>in</strong>ed with face-to-face<br />

<strong>in</strong>teraction with participants.<br />

Further, it was envisaged that various <strong>in</strong>fluenc<strong>in</strong>g factors result<strong>in</strong>g from<br />

participants’ stroke could affect their ability to learn the new vocabulary and<br />

99

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!