Cannizzaro Coelho

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/263889202
Analysis of narrative discourse structure as an ecologically relevant measure

of executive function in adults.
Article in Journal of Psycholinguistic Research · January 2013

DOI: 10.1007/s10936-012-9231-5.
CITATIONS READS
19 301
2 authors:
Michael Steven Cannizzaro Carl A Coelho

University of Vermont University of Connecticut
27 PUBLICATIONS 572 CITATIONS 124 PUBLICATIONS 3,638 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Rehabilitation of Narrative Language and Discourse View project
Discourse following TBI View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Carl A Coelho on 17 July 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

J Psycholinguist Res (2013) 42:527–549
DOI 10.1007/s10936-012-9231-5
Analysis of Narrative Discourse Structure

as an Ecologically Relevant Measure
of Executive Function in Adults
Michael S. Cannizzaro · Carl A. Coelho
Published online: 29 November 2012

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012
Abstract This study examined the narrative discourse production and executive function
(EF) abilities of 46 neuro-typical adults (18–98 years old). Two questions were addressed: Is
the analysis of narrative structure sensitive to changes associated with aging? & What is the
relationship between measures of narrative structure and EF? Narratives were elicited under
two conditions and narrative structure was analyzed for the presence of organizing story gram-
mar elements. Narrative structure was significantly correlated with age as well as linguistic
and non-linguistic measures of EF. Factor analysis of story structure and EF variables yielded
two factors reflecting constructs of output-fluidity and organizational-efficiency. These data
suggest that narrative structure and EF represent aspects of goal-directed knowledge that are
not bound by a traditional linguistic and non-linguistic division. Thus, narrative structure
may represent a global and ecologically valid measure of goal-directed executive function
knowledge that is also sensitive to changes associated with typical aging.
Keywords Narrative discourse · Executive function · Age · Story grammar
Introduction
Typical (i.e., non-pathological) aging has been associated with physiological changes in
the structure and function of the prefrontal cortex (Motes et al. 2011; Tisserand and Jolles
2003). Numerous higher order cognitive functions have been attributed to, and are thought
to be dependent upon the intact functioning of the prefrontal cortex. These abilities include
complex language processes such as discourse production and higher order cognitive skills
M. S. Cannizzaro (B)
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Vermont, 401 Pomeroy Hall,
489 Main Street, Burlington, VT 05405, USA
e-mail: mcannizz@uvm.edu
C. A. Coelho
Communication Sciences Department, University of Connecticut, 850 Bolton Rd. Unit 1085,
Storrs, CT 06269-1085, USA
123
528 J Psycholinguist Res (2013) 42:527–549
such as executive functions (EF) (Lezak et al. 2004; Wood and Grafman 2003; Ylvisaker
et al. 2001, 2008). The production and comprehension of discourse is thought to represent
one of the most complex and socially relevant forms of communication, but has received less
attention in the research literature relative to other aspects of age-related changes in cognitive
and communicative abilities (Ska et al. 2009).
Recent investigations of discourse comprehension in healthy aging populations describe
a number of changes related to advanced age (Ska et al. 2009). In general, discourse compre-
hension abilities decline with age (McGinnis et al. 2008; Tye-Murray et al. 2008; Wright et
al. 2011) although this relationship is not strictly linear (Obler et al. 1994) and is thought to
be influenced by the status of EF abilities (Fleming 2009; Obler et al. 1994). While semantic
and sentential processing remain relatively intact, studies of event-related cortical activity
and behavior have noted declines in processing speed and message level comprehension.
Complexities in discourse processing such as tracking multiple characters, recognizing char-
acter shifts, answering questions related to narratives, attending to newly presented elements
in discourse, and attending to multiple discourse partners also becomes more challenging for
older communicators (Murphy et al. 2006; Noh et al. 2007; Noh and Stine-Morrow 2009;
Ulatowska et al. 1986).
Age-related changes have also been reported for discourse production performance and
picture description is a frequently used task for eliciting this information (Cooper 1990;
Glosser and Deser 1992; Heller 1993; Le Dorze and BÉDard 1998; MacKenzie 2000; North
et al. 1986; Shewan and Henderson 1988; Ulatowska et al. 1986). Communication efficiency,
or the amount of information conveyed over time, appears particularly sensitive to age-
related differences and has been reported to decrease with age (Le Dorze and BÉDard 1998;
MacKenzie 2000; Shewan and Henderson 1988). Similarly, slower speaking rates, longer
pause times, greater variation in the use of fillers, more repeated comments, and word finding
difficulties are more common in older individuals during picture description (Cooper 1990; Le
Dorze and BÉDard 1998; Shewan and Henderson 1988). While these studies are instructive
regarding the relationship between age and discourse production, picture description tasks
are not naturalistic, require minimal cognitive organizational abilities, and do not have a
commonplace homologue in everyday communication.
It has been suggested that discourse tasks need to be cognitively demanding and suffi-
ciently challenging to appreciate the subtle performance differences that can occur with aging
(North et al. 1986; Ulatowska et al. 1986). The analysis of story narratives and procedural
discourse has revealed that older adults produce increasingly ambiguous linguistic referents
and discourse of lesser overall quality (North et al. 1986; Ulatowska et al. 1986). In addi-
tion story narratives of older participants contain significantly fewer propositions, include
fewer elements of story structure (e.g., setting & resolution components), and demonstrate
differences in organizational aspects of narrative production (Gaesser et al. 2010; North et
al. 1986; Ulatowska et al. 1986). These findings suggest that the formation of the discourse
message is lacking due to reduced use of structurally organizing elements that contribute to
the overall clarity of the communication. The narratives of older adults are also characterized
by reduced information quality, density of information, and use of reference and cohesive
devices (Juncos-Rabadàn et al. 2005; Marini et al. 2005). These difficulties with the accuracy
and clarity of narratives may also be accompanied by inclusion of irrelevant content and, in
some cases, production of longer narratives overall (Capilouto et al. 2005; Juncos-Rabadàn et
al. 2005). The inclusion of elements not related to the theme of the narratives is an indication
that older narrators do not adhere to the structural configuration of the discourse. Person-
ally relevant narratives are also susceptible to changes in quality marked by reduced global
coherence and off-topic productions (Glosser and Deser 1992).
123
J Psycholinguist Res (2013) 42:527–549 529
Overall these findings reveal that the discourse production of the oldest populations tends
to be less coherent, less informative, incomplete, and potentially more confusing for listeners.
This may be attributable to a reduced ability to implement organizational frameworks that
facilitate formation of discourse. This is particularly apparent in more cognitively demanding
discourse tasks (i.e., story or personal narratives) analyzed at the macro- or super-structural
level (i.e., story grammar). While previous studies have observed that changes in discourse
abilities are related to or mediated by complex cognitive functions, this relationship has
not been systematically explored in healthy-aging populations. Clinically-based research
in patients with neurogenic discourse impairments suggest a strong relationship between
deficits in EF abilities and competence in discourse (Alexander 2006; Ash et al. 2006, 2009;
Blair et al. 2007; Coelho 2002; Murray and Stout 1999; Peelle and Grossman 2008; Tucker
and Hanlon 1998; Ylvisaker et al. 2008). Understanding how these communication abil-
ities vary in healthy populations is an important benchmark for determining severity of
deficit and potential treatment candidacy options for neurological populations that exhibit
discourse deficits (Cannizzaro and Coelho 2002; Cannizzaro et al. Forthcoming; Ylvisaker
2003; Ylvisaker et al. 2008). Additionally, it is apparent from previous investigations that
age is an important variable to be considered when using discourse as a tool for clinical
comparison or psycholinguistic research (Capilouto et al. 2005).
The present study utilizes discourse analyses and measures of EF to systematically describe
age-related variation in neurotypical adults and the relationship between discourse production
and associated cognitive abilities (e.g., EF). Story narratives were selected for study because
they provide researchers with a naturalistic unit of language and the organizational structure of
a story narrative provides a predictable framework upon which language is organized around
characters and events (temporally and causally linked; Liles 1985; Merritt and Liles 1989).
The mental frameworks purported to underlie story structure are thought to be somewhat
generic within a culture and based upon a mental concept called a story schema (Coelho 1998;
Mandler 1977; Merritt and Liles 1989; Schneider and Winship 2002; Stein and Glenn 1979).
These schemas are theoretically related to goal-directed executive knowledge necessary for
the categorization, organization, and management of large-scale information units involved
in purposeful volitional behavior (Grafman 1995; Wood and Grafman 2003; Wood et al.
2005). Narrative discourse structure (e.g., story grammar) is theoretically-related to executive
function, and represents a type of goal-directed thinking and action similar to other knowledge
stored and processed in the prefrontal cortex, sometimes referred to as structured event
complex knowledge (Grafman 1995; Wood and Grafman 2003; Wood et al. 2005; Ylvisaker
et al. 2008).
The present study addresses the following research questions:
1) Is the analysis of narrative structure sensitive to changes associated with aging? This rela-
tionship is explored through the analysis of story narrative production and demographic
variability (e.g., age, education, verbal IQ). Based on previous research, it is hypothesized
that story narrative production ability will vary systematically with age, demonstrating
significant negative relationships.
2) What is the relationship between measures of narrative discourse structure and executive
functions? This relationship is explored through the analysis of organizing story grammar
elements found in narrative productions and scores on standardized measures of executive
function. Based on previous theoretical and clinical research, it is hypothesized that
narrative discourse structure is closely related to executive functions ability and represents
a similar type of knowledge construct.
123
Method
Participants
Forty-six neurologically healthy adults (67 % female), ages 18–98 years (M = 56.78, SD
= 23.7) qualified for inclusion into this study and completed the entire testing battery. All
participants met the inclusion criteria and were monolingual, native speakers of American
English. Additionally, screening required participants to be community dwelling (e.g., not-
nursing home residents) and independent in all aspects of their self-care; including high-level
activities of daily living (e.g., banking, shopping, scheduling of daily tasks, medication admin-
istration, etc.). Individuals included in this study all had a minimum of a high-school diploma.
As assessed by self-report, participants had no history of neurological insult, substance abuse,
language disorder, or learning disability. All participants demonstrated adequate visual and
auditory acuity necessary for the tasks in the study protocol by reading aloud the informed
consent form and then following the verbal directions provided by the examiner to complete
the form. Table 1 summarizes the participant population in regard to age, Verbal IQ, and
number of years of education.
Procedure
This study followed all guidelines to protect the research participants as set forth by the
University’s Committee on Human Subjects in Research. Subjects were recruited from the
university campus and surrounding communities using flyers, newspaper advertisements,
electronic communications, and word of mouth. Data collection took place in a quite office
on the university campus, in a single visit for each individual participant. Sessions lasted
approximately 2 h and all tasks were scheduled in the same order for all participants. Follow-
ing the participant consent process, screening, demographic data collection, and assessments
of Verbal IQ, the stories were elicited, followed by the executive function assessments in the
same order as the tasks appear below.
Story Retell Task
Participants were asked to tell a story from the 30 page wordless picture book Good Dog, Carl,
(Day 1985). This book depicts a story narrative, consisting of multiple connected episodes.
The book was presented to the participants along with the following instructions:
“This book tells a story with pictures, please look through the story at your own pace.
When you are finished tell me the complete story as if you were telling the story to
someone who has never seen the book before. Do not just describe the pictures, but tell
a story about what is happening in the book. Begin your story with the phrase ‘this is
a story about’ and when you are finished say ‘the end”’.
Table 1 Participant demographic data
N = 46 Age VIQ YRSED
Mean (SD) 56.78 (27.7) 13.04 (2.44) 16.28 (2.37)

[Range] [18–98] [8–18] [12–20]
YRSED years of education, VIQ Verbal IQ Information & Vocabulary Scaled Score Average
123
Story Generation Task
A copy of the Norman Rockwell painting “The Runaway” was shown to the participants.
The following instructions were provided:
“This picture tells a story. Tell me the complete story of what you think is happening in
this picture as if you were telling the story to someone who has never seen the picture
before. Start with the events that might lead up to the scene in the picture and finish
with what will happen afterwards. Do not just describe the picture, but tell a story about
what you think is happening. Begin your story with the phrase ‘this is a story about’
and when you are finished say ‘the end’.” During this task, the picture remained in full
view of the participant until he or she had completed the task.
In both narrative task elicitation conditions, instructions were provided orally and a printed
version of the instructions remained in full view of the participant until he or she was ready
to begin the task (see “Appendices A & B” for example transcripts).
Measures of Executive Functions
The Delis and Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS; Delis et al. 2001) was used as
the standardized measure for executive function (EF) skills. Subtests designed to assess goal-
directed thinking and behavior (e.g., concept formation, problem-solving, strategic planning,
rule learning, cognitive flexibility) as well as measures known to be sensitive to age-related
cognitive slowing (Motes et al. 2011 e.g., speed and inhibition) were included in this study.
All scores used in the calculations in this study were raw scores from the D-KEFS. Raw
scores were used instead of scaled scores because the scaled scores and other transformed
scores are influenced by participant age.
Linguistically-based measures of executive function Verbal Fluency; scores from cate-
gory switching (CAT-SWIT; measures the number of times a participant accurately switches
between generating names of two different categories of nouns e.g., fruit/furniture) and total
accuracy (CAT-ACC; the total number of correct responses that fit into each noun category);
Twenty Questions; scores from total asked (20?-ASK; equal to the number of turns necessary
for the participant to identify an unknown object from a set of 30 stimuli items by asking
yes/no questions) and—total achievement (20?-ACH; based on how effectively questions
were generated to come to the appropriate answer); and Color-Word Interference; inhibition
score (INHIB; a “Stroop” like task measuring the time in seconds taken to complete a task
that involved inhibiting the proponent response of reading written word and naming the ink
color).
Non-linguistically based measures of executive function Design Fluency; scores from
switching (DF-SWIT; visual and spatial analog to verbal fluency in a rule based design
fluency paradigm where the number of accurate switches between two rules are recorded)
and number correct (DF-COR; the total number of correct responses that fit into each design
category); Tower; scores from total achievement (TOW; similar to other tower tasks in that
planning and executing a series of moves is necessary to create specified tower constructions
where scoring is based on efficiency); Trails; scores from motor speed (TRL-MOT; a simple
measure of motor speed measured in seconds) and—number letter switching (TRL-NLS; a
visual and spatial analog to the color-word interference in where participants draw a pattern
while inhibiting the proponent response of following a single sequence, e.g., numbers, and
stitch back and forth between two sequences, e.g., numbers and letters, also measured in
seconds).
123
Mixed (e.g., linguistic and non-linguistic) measures of executive functions included Card
Sorting; scores from number correct (CS-COR; the ability to generate linguistic and non-
linguistic categories in groupings of items), recognition (CS-REC; the ability to identify
linguistic and non-linguistic categories in groupings of items), and description (CS-DES; the
ability to describe linguistic and non-linguistic categories in groupings of items).
Verbal I.Q.
Verbal I.Q. was estimated by averaging each participant’s scaled scores from the vocabulary
and information sub-tests of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales third edition (Wechsler
1997). This measure served as a standardized assessment of overall verbal ability.
Transcription and Data Preparation
All story narratives were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Ten percent (n = 5) of the
participants’ transcripts were coded for reliability by an independent judge. Reliability was
based on two judge inter-rater reliability and calculated as the number of words disputed,
divided by the total words mutually correctly identified in the transcripts, multiplied by
100. Inter-rater reliability was 98 %. Resolutions of differences in the narrative transcription
were reached through consensus by both raters. The narrative samples were then analyzed
according to the procedures outlined below.
Each narrative was segmented into T-units, considered to be roughly equivalent to a
spoken sentence. A T-unit is a minimal terminal unit that consists of a main clause and its
subordinate clauses or its non-clausal structures attached or embedded in the main clause
(Shadden 1998). Each T-unit was numbered according to its chronological occurrence in the
narrative production and then coded for story grammar components as defined by Stein and
Glenn (1979; see Table 2 and “Appendices A & B” for example transcripts).
The essential episode structure described by Stein and Glenn includes initiating events,
attempts, and direct consequences. All T-units fitting into these categories were designated
as an element within an episode structure. All other T-units were labeled non-episodic. Each
narrative was identified as either a complete episode (COMP; containing all three essential
episode components related to each other) or an incomplete episode (INC; containing two
or fewer essential episode components). The total number of T-units that fulfilled any of the
three essential episode components was then summed and divided by the total number of
T-units in each narrative to yield an index of the proportion of episodic T-units (TUP).
Reliability was assessed for inter- and intra-judge reliability. Ten percent (n = 5) of the
participant narratives were randomly chosen and re-coded by the original judge. A second
judge trained in the procedures for coding but blind to the hypotheses of the study scored this
same sample. The scores from these selected narratives were then compared regarding the
narrative analysis scores assigned by the two judges. Intra-judge reliability based on simple
agreement was 97 % for the re-scored narratives and the inter-judge reliability was 95 % for
the re-scored narratives.
Results
Preliminary analysis using independent groups t tests were used to explore the potential
gender differences in the enrolled participants with regard to age, Verbal IQ, and years of
123
Table 2 Stein and Glenn’s (1979) story grammar identification rules
Essential episode components Types
Initiating event(s)—causes a response in the main character Natural occurrence(s)—a change of state
in the physical environment
Action(s)—an action performed by a char-
acter that evokes a response
Internal Event(s)—changes in internal
physiological states
Attempt(s)—cause or lead to resolution Action(s)—actions undertaken due to the
initiating event toward the attainment of
goal.
Direct consequence(s)—expresses attainment or non- Natural occurrence(s)—naturally occur-
attainment of the characters goal, other changes due to ring incident that directly effects the
actions, and leads a eaction attainment of the goal set up by the ini-
tiating event
Action(s)—action that directly effects the
attainment of the goal set up by the initi-
ating event
End State(s)—final consequence directly
relates to attainment of the goal set up by
the initiating event
Adapted from Stein and Glenn (1979, pp. 58–67)
education. These variables did not differ significantly between males and females thus gender
was collapsed for all analyses.
The relationship between age and story grammar performance was explored to discern
patterns in the story narrative and EF data that reveal relationships in the performance abilities
based on demographic variability. Age-related variability in story grammar performance and
EF performance was examined by means of correlation analysis. Factor analytic techniques
were also employed to explore the relationship between SG and EF performance in relation
to a larger cognitive construct of more general goal-directed behavior.
Means, ranges, and standard deviations for story grammar and executive function measures
are reported in Table 3.
Story Narrative Task Differences
To examine task-related differences between the story retell and story generation conditions
for the SG variables of interest (e.g., COMP-R, TUP-R, COMP-G, TUP-G), matched pairs
t tests were conducted between analogous measures under the two different narrative con-
ditions (COMP-R vs. COMP-G; and TUP-R vs. COMP-G). Results indicated that both the
complete episode measure [COMP-R vs. COMP-G, t (44) = 9.51, p ≤ .001] and the pro-
portion of t units within episode structure measures [TUP-R vs. COMP-G, t (44) = 4.87,
p ≤ .001] were significantly different between the story retell and the story generation
conditions (see Table 4).
Story Grammar Performance, Age, Verbal IQ, and Education
Preliminary statistical analyses revealed that the variables complete episodes in retelling
(COMP-R), complete episodes in generation (COMP-G), proportion of T-units in episodes
123
Table 3 Demographic, story grammar, and executive function variables
Mean Range SD
AGE 56.42 18–98 23.84

YRSED 16.24 12–20 2.39
VIQ 13.00 8–18 2.46
COMP-R 5.13 1–12 2.34
INC-R .36 0–2 .68
TUP-R .85 .50–1 .12
COMP-G 1.98 0–6 1.2
INC-G .18 0–1 .39
TUP-G .713 .3–1 .19
CAT-SWIT 14.38 9–21 2.71
20?-ASK 27.47 13–74 9.17
20?-ACH 14.91 2–20 3.23
INHIB 58.16 29–105 20.45
DF-SWIT 8.11 2–17 3.35
DF-COR 36.71 25–56 6.62
TOW 15.47 4–26 5.97
TRL-MOT 25.24 10–63 11.78
TRL-NLS 88.80 31–240 52.64
CS-COR 8.96 3–14 2.95
CS-REC 31.38 6–62 15.18
CS-DES 20.91 11–32 5.83
YRSED years of education, VIQ Verbal IQ Scaled Score Average, COMP complete episodes, INC incom-
plete episodes, TUP proportion of T-units in episode structure, -R retell condition, -G generation condi-
tion, CAT-SWIT verbal fluency-category switching, 20?-ASK twenty questions-total asked, 20?-ACH twenty
questions-total achievement, INHIB color-word interference-inhibition, DF-SWIT design fluency-switching,
DF-COR design fluency-correct, TOW tower-total achievement, TRL-MOT trails-motor speed, TRL-NLS trails -
number letter switching, CS-COR card sorting-correct, CS-REC card sorting-recognition, CS-DES card sorting-
description. Raw scores are reported for all Executive Function measures
Table 4 Matched pairs T test between story grammar conditions: retell & generation
Paired differences Mean SD Std. error mean t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Pair 1
COMP-R versus COMP-G 5.13 2.34 .33 9.51 44 <.001
1.98 1.20
Pair 2
TUP-R versus TUP- G .85 .11 .03 4.87 44 <.001
.71 .19
COMP complete episodes, TUP proportion of T-units in episode structure, -R retell condition, -G generation
condition
in retelling (TUP-R), and proportion of T-units in episodes in generation (TUP-G) met the
assumption of a normal distribution and were subsequently submitted to parametric Pear-
son’s product moment correlations. Incomplete episodes in retelling (INC-R) and incomplete
123
Table 5 Correlation table of story grammar, age, verbal IQ, & years of education
Age YRSED COMP-R INC-R TUP-R COMP-G INC-G TUP-G
Age −.03 .02 −.34 M −.33 M .11 −.19

(.85) (.88) (.02) (.03) (.46) (.22)
YRSED .23 .11 .04 −.06 −.11 .11 −.17
(.13) (.46) (.79) (.69) (.42) (.49) (.27)
VIQ .11 .52 L .12 .10 −.07 −.07 .02 −.23
(.48) (<.001)* (.42) (.50) (.65) (.63) (.92) (.13)
YRSED years of education, VIQ verbal IQ, COMP complete episodes, INC incomplete episodes, TUP pro-
portion of T-units in episode structure, -R retell condition, -G generation condition, M medium effect size
r = ±.3−.49, L large effect size, r > ±.5, ( p value), * Significant Correlation of p < .002
episodes in generation (INC-G) did not meet this assumption. Therefore these two variables
were submitted to non-parametric Spearman Rho correlations.
To control for Type I errors across the 21 correlations computed, a stringent significance
level was adopted ( p < .002) based on a Bonferoni correction for 21 multiple comparisons
for a .05 alpha level (.05/21). Due to the conservative nature of this analysis procedure and the
relatively small sample size (n = 46), effect sizes are were calculated. Correlation coefficients
ranging from .30 to .49 are considered medium effect sizes and coefficients of .50 and above
are considered large effect sizes when estimating the relationship between variables (Cohen
1992; Green and Salkind 2003).
The proportion of T Units within episode structure (TUP-R) in the story retelling con-
dition and the number of complete episodes (COMP-G) were negatively correlated with
age with medium effect size relationships. Verbal IQ was significantly positively correlated
with number of years of education (YRSED) demonstrating a large effect size relationship.
Correlation coefficients and effect size estimates are summarized in Table 5.
Story Grammar and Linguistically-Based Executive Functions
The relationship between story grammar abilities and linguistically-based executive func-
tions was examined by computing Pearson product-moment correlations for the story
grammar variables complete episodes (COMP) and proportion of T units within episode
structure (TUP), and Spearman’s rank order correlations for the incomplete episodes
(INC) variable. Story grammar performance variables (COMP, INC, and TUP, for the
story retell and generation conditions) and measures from the linguistically-based sub-
tests: Verbal Fluency—category switching (CAT-SWIT) and total accuracy (CAT-ACC);
Twenty Questions: total asked (20?-ASK) and total achievement (20?-ACH); and Color-
Word Interference—inhibition (INHIB). To control for Type I error across the 24 computed
correlations a p value of less than .002 (.05/24 = .002) was adopted. Once again, medium and
large effect sizes are also reported. The correlation matrix for these comparisons appears in
Table 6. Although none of the correlation coefficients reached statistical significance, three
were noted to have medium effect size relationships. These included the correlations between
the story grammar variable COMP-G and the linguistically-based executive function mea-
sures CAT-SWIT (r = 43, p = .003), and 20?-ASK (r = .31, p = .04). The third Pearson
product moment correlation coefficient of interest was noted between the SG variable TUP-
R and INHIB (r = .39, p = .008). The story grammar variable INC-R was negatively
correlated to the 20?-ASK (r = −.32, p = .04) with a medium effect size, and positively
123
Table 6 Correlations between story grammar & linguistic executive functions
COMP-R INC-R TUP-R COMP-G INC-G TUP-G
CAT-SWIT .27 .07 .29 .43 M −.09 .11

(.07) (.67) (.06) (.003) (.57) (.48)
20?-ASK −.17 −.32 M −.22 −.31 M −.00 −.04
(.27) (.04) (.16) (.04) (.98) (.81)
20?-ACH .11 .41 M .26 .19 .07 .08
(.52) (.006) (.09) (.22) (.67) (.62)
INHIB −.11 .12 −.39 M −.24 .14 −.23
(.49) (.43) (.008) (.12) (.35) (.14)
COMP complete episodes, INC incomplete episodes, TUP proportion of T-units in episode structure,
R retell condition, G generation condition, ( p value), CAT-SWIT verbal fluency-category switching, 20?-ASK
twenty questions-total asked, 20?-ACH twenty questions-total achievement, INHIB color-word interference-
inhibition, M medium effect size r = ±.3−.49, L large effect size r > ±.5
correlated to 20?-ACH (r = .41, p = .006) with a medium effect size, using the non-
parametric Spearman’s rank order correlation technique.
Story Grammar and Non-linguistic/Mixed Executive Functions
The relationship between the story grammar variables and the measures of non-linguistic
executive function (Design Fluency-switching (DF-SWIT), Design Fluency-correct (DF-
COR); Tower-total achievement (TOW); Trails-motor speed (TRL-MOT), and number letter
switching (TRL-NLS) and mixed, both linguistic and non-linguistic [Card Sorting-correct
(CS-COR), Card Sorting-recognition (CS-REC), and Card Sorting-description (CS-DES)]
were examined by means of Pearson product-moment correlations for the variables COMP
and TUP and Spearman’s Rank order correlations for the INC variables. A p value of less
than .001 (.05/48 = .001) was adopted to control for Type I errors across the 48 computed cor-
relations. Relational effect sizes are again reported. All correlations appear in Table 7. Results
indicated that none of the correlations between the story grammar measures and the mixed
measures of executive functions were significant, although a number of medium relational
effect sizes were observed (DF-COR, TRL-MOT, TRL-NLS). Three notable correlations for
the story grammar measure COMP-G and the non-linguistic measures of executive functions
were observed and included DF-SWIT and TRL-NLS, both were noted to have medium effect
sizes. The third correlation involving the COMP-G variable was with TRL-MOT (r = −.47,
p < .001) this correlation was significant and had a medium effect size relationship. The story
grammar variable INC-R was negatively correlated to, and had a medium effect size rela-
tionship with the non-linguistic executive function measures DF-COR (r = −.33, p < .03)
and TRL-MOT (r = −.37, p < .01).
Factor Analysis of Correlated Story Grammar and Executive Function Variables
In order to delineate the potential for larger psychological constructs based on participant
performance across story narrative and executive function abilities, a factor analysis was
performed. Initially, a principle components analysis with subsequent factor rotation was
performed for all of the normally distributed SG and executive function (EF) variables that
were correlated with a medium to large effect sizes. Because the variables were correlated,
123
Table 7 Correlations between story grammar and non-linguistic executive functions
COMP-R INC-R TUP-R COMP-G INC-G TUP-G
DF-SWIT −.12 −.24 −.07 .37 M −.20 .10

(.44) (.11) (.66) (.01) (.20) (.50)
DF-COR −.13 −.33 M −.17 .07 −.21 −.02
(.41) (.03) (.26) (.63) (.16) (.92)
TOW −.11 .07 −.04 −.08 −.06 −.11
(.47) (.65) (.79) (.62) (.69) (.49)
TRL-MOT .02 −.37 M −.07 −.47 M .13 −.21
(.91) (.01) (.66) (<.001)∗ (.40) (.16)
TRL-NLS .11 .05 −.15 −.30 M .23 −.16
(.48) (.74) (.34) (.04) (.13) (.31)
CS-COR .03 .16 .17 .04 −.16 .08
(.86) (.31) (.28) (.80) (.29) (.60)
CS-REC .17 .10 .29 .25 −.09 .12
(.28) (.50) (.05) (.10) (.56) (.44)
CS-DES .11 .22 .08 .01 −.08 .01
(.49) (.14) (.57) (.95) (.59) (.95)
COMP complete episodes, TUP proportion of T-units in episode structure, R retell condition, G gen-
eration condition, ( p value), DF-SWIT design fluency-switching, DF-COR design fluency-correct, TOW
tower-total achievement, TRL-MOT trails-motor speed, TRL-NLS trails-number letter switching, CS-COR
card sorting-correct, CS-REC card sorting-recognition, CS-DES card sorting-description, M medium effect
size r = ±.3−.49, L large effect size, r > ±.5, * Significant at p < .002
varimax orthogonal rotation was used for factor rotation of the principal components. This
analysis led to a two-factor solution chosen to identify the potential grouping of variable (i.e.,
related psychological constructs). Factor loadings on each of the two factors can be seen in
Table 8. Factor loadings greater than .50, accounting for more than 25 % or greater of the
total variance, were interpreted as having an association with a particular factor (Merenda
1997). Based on knowledge of the cognitive task related demands of the variables, the two
factors were designated as Output-Fluidity and Organization-Efficiency. The story gram-
mar measure COMP-G and five measures of executive function were noted to align under
the Output-Fluidity factor. Of the executive function measures under this factor, two were
linguistically-based (CAT-SWIT & 20?-ASK) and three were non-linguistically-based (DF-
SWIT, TRL-NLS, & TRL-MOT). Under the Organization-Efficiency factor, the story gram-
mar measure TUP-R aligned with a single linguistically-based measures of executive function
(INHIB). The two designated factors, factor 1 and factor 2, account cumulatively for greater
than 60 % of the total variance explained in the rotated factor loadings (see Table 8).
Discussion
Relationship Between Story Grammar Performance, Age, Estimated IQ, and Education
The purpose of the present study was to systematically explore age-related changes in neuro-
typical adults and to better define the relationship between discourse production and other
123
Table 8 Rotated factor pattern and factor weights of correlated story grammar and executive function measures
Variable name (percent of variance accounted) Factor 1 Factor 2

Output-fluidity (39.16 %) Organization-efficiency (60.74 %)
TUP-R 0.65
COMP-G −0.52
TRL-NLS 0.82
TRL-MOT 0.83
DF-SWIT −0.59
CAT-SWIT −0.70
20?-ASK 0.79
INHIB −0.90
Factor loadings of <.5 were not considered to be associated with a factor and were intentionally left blank.
COMP complete episodes, TUP proportion of T-units in episode structure, R retell condition, G generation
condition, CAT-SWIT verbal fluency-category switching, 20?-ASK twenty questions- total asked, INHIB color-
word interference-inhibition, DF-SWIT design fluency-switching, TRL-MOT trails-motor speed, TRL-NLS
trails-number letter switching
high level cognitive abilities in the form of executive functions. Previous findings regarding
discourse measures and educational level have demonstrated significant differences between
persons with less versus more than a high school education (MacKenzie 2000). However,
persons with 12 or more years of education have not been shown to differ with regard to
narrative discourse performance (MacKenzie 2000). All participants in the present study had
attained 12 or more years of formal education. Results indicated that neither YRSED nor VIQ
correlated with measures of SG. It is possible that such restrictive inclusion criteria likely
limited the variability in the VIQ and YRSED data and thus prevented the identification of
differences or relationships with these variables.
It was hypothesized that there would be a linear relationship between age and story gram-
mar performance as established by correlation analysis. This idea was partially supported in
that two of the story grammar measures, TUP-R and COMP-G, demonstrated medium effect
size relationships with age. Executive function abilities have been shown to change with age
and the theoretical link between the story grammar and EF have been discussed as these
measures potentially represent a larger related construct of goal-directed thinking/behavior
referred to as managerial knowledge (Coelho 2002; Wood and Grafman 2003). Given the
exploratory nature of using story grammar variables to detect subtle age-related differences
in cognitive-linguistic abilities, it was reasonable to assume that some measures were more
sensitive than others at detecting differences in neurologically intact persons. The current
findings indicated that TUP-R and COMP-G were sensitive to age-related differences as
measured in a naturalistic discourse task. This is important because it provides evidence of
that discourse organizational structure is a feature of cognitive-linguistic aging that is inde-
pendent of verbal IQ and educational level. Because discourse assessment is an important
communication tool for studying a wide range of neurological disorders (e.g., TBI, demen-
tia) affecting a wide range of age groups, it is important for researchers and clinicians to be
sensitive to potential variability in discourse production skills across the life span. Patterns
of discourse behavior have the potential to be a useful tool for comparing persons to typical
peers or older cohorts possibly leading to indications of early age-related cognitive-linguistic
changes (Chapman et al. 2002). That is, the narrative abilities of older participants would be
123
more appropriately compared to an older profile of typical narrative behavior as suggested

by the results in this study.
Story Retell and TUP-R
The measure TUP-R represents the amount of information directly related to the creation of
episodes within Stein and Glenn’s (1979) component system, and is thought to be an index
of an individual’s ability to organize narrative information (Coelho 2002; Le et al. 2011).
This measure takes into account differences in story length because it is proportional to the
overall amount of information produced. In the present study, fewer episodic components
relative to total information within episode structure was characteristic of older participants’
performance. In other words, older participants produced fewer T-units related to episode
structure and more T-units judged to be extraneous to the creation of complete stories. Older
participants in this study tended to include non-episodic information in the story retell task by
adding personal insights and tangentially related information. For example, older participants
often imparted information from their personal experiences or made value judgments about
the Carl story retell by commenting on such themes as: childrearing in America; Rottweilers
or dogs in general; adventurous youth; and children or grandchildren. These findings of the
inclusion of non-episodic T-units is similar to previous reports that older participants are more
likely to include irrelevant content and, in some cases, leading to less efficient information
transfer as the narratives grow longer (Capilouto et al. 2005; Juncos-Rabadàn et al. 2005;
Wright et al. 2011). The inclusion of less coherent elements not related to the theme of the
narratives is an indication that the structural configuration of the narratives is not adhered to,
and therefore does not dictate the inclusion of necessary, specific, or appropriate information
related to the topic of the discourse. This pattern has also been documented in personally
relevant narratives as decreases in quality are related to reduced global coherence and off
topic productions (Glosser and Deser 1992).
In general, the proportion of information that contributed to the creation of episodes during
retelling decreased with age and appeared to be a sensitive measure of age-related cognitive-
linguistic variation between older and younger participants. The organization of meaningfully
related information has been described as a point of intersection between cognitive and
linguistic processing related to the executive control of information (Coelho 2002; Glosser
and Deser 1992; Ylvisaker et al. 2008). Additionally, professional and naïve raters alike have
linked episode-related story grammar content in narratives with story production superiority
(McCabe 1984; Schneider and Winship 2002). While this and previous investigations support
the view that TUP-R and the like are a sensitive measure of discourse organization, it is
reasonable to suggest that a measurable difference in narrative TUP-R may be indicative of a
difference in the more general knowledge structures that guide goal-directed behaviors. In this
case, specific to narrative discourse production, the ability to create and maintain a concise
episode structure was changed by information that is beyond the intended goal of narrative
episode retelling. It has been hypothesized that the inclusion of non-episodic information may
be due to differences in memory or attention due to the relatively intact nature of the episode
(Ulatowska et al. 1986). It is also incongruous with the overarching goal-directed behavior
employed for story telling, as extra-episodic information adds information unnecessary for
the completion of episodes within a narrative task, making the process less efficient (see
“Appendix A” for example transcript).
Other investigations involving older participants have also noted similar patterns of nar-
rative discourse differences regarding the intrusion of extraneous information. For example,
global ratings of conversational patterns in healthy elderly samples have indicated that older
123
individuals demonstrate poorer organization in relation to the overall topic (Glosser and Deser
1992). This pattern has also been observed in well-educated older females (mean age 76.2)
who used significantly fewer structural story components when completing a task analogous
to the story-retelling task in the present study (North et al. 1986). North et al. (1986) observed
that in spite of the fact that older subjects produced fewer story components, their subjects
produced a comparable number of propositions overall. Such a finding would suggest, as
was the case in the present study, that North’s older subjects produced relatively more propo-
sitions that did not contribute to the structural aspects of the narrative (i.e., story grammar
components). Medium effect size relationships were noted with increased age a decreased
proportion of non-episodic components in the story retellings of older participants.
Story Generation and COMP-G
In the story generation condition, the measure COMP-G was negatively correlated with age
with a medium effect size relationship. Advanced age was associated with decreased produc-
tion of complete episodes during story generation and older participants created narratives
that consisted of fewer total episodes. These findings suggest that advanced age co-varies
with COMP-G but may not relate to content organization ability (cf. Coelho 2002), but to
an overall decrease in total output. This was demonstrated by the fact that COMP-G and
INC-G or the proportion of TUP-G were not significantly correlated nor was there an appre-
ciable effect size relationship. Overall, the older participants produced complete episodes in
the generation condition without the inclusion of non-episodic information, although fewer
episodes and ides were generated (see “Appendix B” for example transcripts).
Age and SG Correlations
Age related differences in narrative production were sensitively assessed in healthy adults
by looking at the proportional relationship between content and structure of the narrative
retellings (TUP-R). This was evidenced by negative age-related increase in the number of
T-units not contributing to the story grammar model. This proportional decrease in episode
information with age in story retelling was not seen in the story generation task. In the gener-
ation condition, age was related to an overall decrease in the production of complete episodes
(e.g. number of complete story ideas). This pattern of dissociation is potentially attributable
to cognitive-linguistic demands imposed by the different tasks. The retell condition provides
a lot of information for participants to recall and organize. This includes stated or concrete
information depicted by the scenes in the book, as well as unstated or inferential information
related to how one interprets the pictured narratives. It is possible that the ability to organize
all of this information related to the overriding episodic structure led to decreased efficiency
in conveying episode relevant information. The generation task is demanding in that the par-
ticipants must create episode information where information form only one moment in time
is depicted. In this situation it is possible that the demands of generating structure and con-
tent pushed cognitive-linguistic resources to their maximum and leading older participants
to generate fewer episodes overall.
Chapman et al. (2002) have noted that detail level discourse information (e.g., episode
components) is likely to change in healthy elderly while gist level information (i.e., overarch-
ing theme, moral, etc.) remains relatively intact throughout eight and ninth decades of life. A
detail level approach with the inclusion of T-units outside of the story line (i.e., personal infor-
mation or story judgments) in the retelling task would account for the pattern of increased
123
non-episode content in the older participants performance. However, further investigation of

specific qualitative performance differences would be needed to confirm this notion.
In the present study, the quantitative difference between these tasks was highlighted in
the paired difference T test, demonstrated significant differences between the retell and
generation condition for both the COMP and TUP measures indicating that overall the gener-
ation tasks were more challenging overall. These differences have also been noted in previous
studies involving story narratives. (Coelho 2002; Coelho et al. 1990; Liles et al. 1989).
Relationship Between Story Grammar Performance and Executive Functions
The relationships between SG and EF variables were investigated using correlation and factor
analytic techniques. These analyses were undertaken to examine the relationships between
SG, linguistic, non-linguistic, and mixed measures of goal-directed behavior in the form of
standardized measures of executive functions. An additional hypothesis predicted definable
components underlying the larger cognitive construct of structured event complex (SEC)
knowledge (Grafman 2006; Grafman and Krueger 2008; Wood and Grafman 2003). Simply
stated, complex cognitive behaviors that involve achieving a goal (e.g., telling a cohesive story,
planning a party) activate knowledge stores that include parameters such as the activation
of appropriate information, organizational structure, and social knowledge (Grafman 2006;
Grafman and Krueger 2008; Wood and Grafman 2003; Wood et al. 2005). Factor analysis
of related story grammar and EF variables supported a two-factor view underlying the larger
goal-directed concept of SEC knowledge.
Initial analyses revealed that TUP-R, COMP-G, and INC-R, were varied in association
with three measures of linguistically based EF: Verbal Fluency, 20 Questions, and Color-
Word Interference. The same narrative measures were also associated with two assessments
of non-linguistically-based EF: Design Fluency and Trails. This somewhat evenly balanced
pattern supports a preliminary notion that these measures may not be bound by linguistic and
non-linguistic constructs. This finding suggests that some SG measures and some measures of
EF are potentially components of a larger more general overarching knowledge construct that
similarly influences SG and EF scores in aging. This pattern of association between numerous
measures of goal-directed behavior has been predicted by SEC knowledge used guide com-
plex thinking and behavior aimed at the achievement of goals (Crozier et al. 1999; Grafman
1989, 1993, 2006; Grafman and Krueger 2008; Wood and Grafman 2003). Structured even
complex knowledge assumes that the cognitive architecture that guides goal-directed thought
and behavior is stored and processed in aggregated units of information in the distributed
throughout the prefrontal cortex. SEC Knowledge is activated as a structural framework for
understanding and performing goal-directed activities such as acting appropriately in a fine
dining restaurant, planning for complex future events, or telling a story. This conceptualiza-
tion is more inclusive of the cognitive structure required for complex every day tasks and
encompasses both linguistic and non-linguistic components often separated by neuropsycho-
logical tasks (cf. Delis et al. 2001; Royall et al. 2002). It has been suggested that discourse
behavior lies at the intersection of cognition and language as goal-directed behavior guides
language to create organized discourse information, with both aspects necessary for episode
creation (Ylvisaker et al. 2001, 2008).
Factor Analysis and SEC Knowledge
The principle components analysis and subsequent factor rotation provided insight into
the possible goal-directed aspects of behaviors indicative of age-related variations in SEC
123
knowledge. The present investigation identified two factors that grouped scores from the
measured SG and EF variables. The two factors were designated Output-Fluidity and
Organization-Efficiency, based on the types information processing involved for the tasks
that clustered together.
Output-Fluidity
The Output-Fluidity factor was distinguished by its alignment with the variables: COMP-G;
Verbal Fluency (e.g., category switching accuracy); Trails (e.g., motor speed and number-
letter switching); Design Fluency (e.g., correct sorts); and twenty questions (e.g., total asked).
The factor was so designated Output-Fluidity by the similar characteristics of the related
variables. The SG score COMP-G, as mentioned earlier, was the total number of complete
episodes produced in the story generation task. This measure was conceptualized as the
quantity of fully realized ideas leading to achieving the goal of generating episodes within
a story narrative. Story generation relies on the rules and boundaries of language and the
individual’s internal representation of the story framework (Coelho 1998; Liles et al. 1995).
As mentioned earlier, the SG score COMP-G is related to novel production of language that
conforms to organizational framework of SG. Under the construct Output-fluidity, related EF
scores of Verbal Fluency, Design Fluency, 20 questions measures all required participants
to produce a variety of novel solutions to unfamiliar tasks working within the bounds of a
supplied rule system. It is plausible to assume that the ability to generate multiple correct
and complete answers in accordance with task demands might be analogous to generating
complete story episodes. Greater output fluidity in these areas is negatively related to age as
were measures related to speed of processing (e.g., motor speed and number-letter switching)
which are reliant on overall speed of performance and total output. These variables are timed
achievement measures and higher scores (i.e., the total number of seconds to complete)
are associated with poorer performance. Again, the ability to produce output towards goal
completion, in this case measured by completion speed, was highly associated with aging.
The aforementioned variables associated with the Output-Fluidity factor all demonstrate
commonalties in their measurement of total overall generation of novel and complete output
towards specific goal achievement.
Organization-Efficiency
This second factor was comprised two of this study’s measures associated with cognitive and
organizational behaviors. The narrative measure TUP-R represents a proportional increase in
non-episodic information in the story retell condition. The variable INHIB was also strongly
associated with this factor and can be characterized as the ability to use information efficiently
by blocking out unwanted information, even if that information is salient or closely related, to
arrive at a goal. In the INHIB task examinees were asked to name the color ink used to print a
word while inhibiting the urge to read the printed word itself. They were told to work quickly
and accurately reading across the page from left to right, top to bottom until they reach the
end. The participants needed to maintain an organization rule to focus on one particularly
salient feature of the word, the ink color, and prevent the prepotent response of reading the
word itself. The additional time needed to complete this measure was likely due to increased
effort in inhibiting the non-preferred response. This task is the epitome of executive or willed
control of language as success depends on the focused and correct completion of target verbal
behaviors while distractions are inhibited (Roelofs and Hagoort 2002). The reading material
is not complex enough to pose a great impact on task speed. However, the automatic impulse
123
of the participant is to read the word and inhibition of that preferred response creates the
goal challenge in the task. The ability to produce the correct response (e.g., naming the color
of the ink) without intrusion of other relevant but unintended target behavior (e.g., reading
the word) is similar to creating episodes without non-episodic information. In the TUP-R
measure, the ability to inhibit or control information to episode relevant information units is
challenging when presented with so much pictured and implied information. In this way, it
was possible to draw behavioral analogies between the TUP-R measure and the INHIB score,
as both measures possess qualities of organization and the efficient structuring of information
within a given framework without the inclusion of unnecessary information or information
that is not salient in reaching the stated goals of the task.
Summary of Behavior Factors Under the Managerial Knowledge Framework
The most parsimonious understanding of these data supports an overarching hypothesis that
SG, linguistic and non-linguistic EF measures aggregate under a more general construct
of goal-directed thinking and behavior referred to as SEC knowledge (Crozier et al. 1999;
Grafman 1989, 1993, 2006; Grafman and Krueger 2008; Wood and Grafman 2003). Indeed,
these data provided no evidence to support a linguistic versus a non-linguistic model, which is
one of the most basic distinctions drawn between underlying cognitive functions in complex
behaviors (Delis et al. 2001). To this end, the view of executive control function, or SEC
knowledge for the purpose of this study, support a multi-factorial view of high-level generic
aspects of cognition in the form of Output-Fluidity and Organization-Efficiency. That is, SEC
knowledge is manifest in goal-directed behaviors specific to measures of aspects of executive
control and narrative discourse, and not just a pilot of underlying cognitive function. Graf-
man’s (1989, 1993, 2006; Crozier et al. 1999; Grafman and Krueger 2008; Wood and Grafman
2003) explanation of SEC knowledge would suggest that goal-directed behaviors would be
created and stored through the employment of generic frameworks of knowledge, aggregated
and distributed by certain attributes (e.g., familiarity, emotional valence) throughout the pre-
frontal cortex (Krueger et al. 2007; Wood and Grafman 2003; Wood et al. 2005). These
knowledge frameworks, also known as scripts and procedural knowledge, act as the basic
underlying structure for well-orchestrated and goal-directed stories, plans, and thoughts, as
well as the completion of complex tasks (Le et al. 2011; Partiot et al. 1996; Sirigu et al.
1998, 1996; Wood et al. 2005; Zalla et al. 1998). While the present data support this view,
the caveat is higher-order functions also must rely heavily upon, and interact with, other
contributing aspects of cognition such as language and memory. Consistent with this multi-
faceted yet integrated view is the notion that the prefrontal cortex is thought to be the seat
of executive control and managerial knowledge, and exhibits extraordinary interconnectivity
with other all other areas of the brain such as language and visuo-spatial centers (Grafman
2006; Grafman and Litvan 1999; Royall et al. 2002).
Conclusion
The findings of the current study are consistent with previous investigations across a vari-
ety of disciplines that have noted age-related differences in complex cognitive and linguis-
tic processing. Specific to discourse, it has been suggested that age-related changes are
more pronounced in the older elderly, these changes occur even in well-educated adults,
and also occur across a variety of discourse genres (Ulatowska et al. 1986). Participants in
this study included proportionally less episodic information in story retelling and produced
123
fewer complete episodes in story generation as age increased. These changes are thought
be related to efficiency of information exchange and overall differences in the generation
of complete narrative ideas. Story grammar ability appears to be equally strongly related to
performance on both linguistic and non-linguistic measures of executive function and may
provide a balanced, ecologically valid measure of goal-directed behavior under a larger con-
struct of SEC knowledge. These age-related differences suggest that these measures may
provide an appropriate and sensitive benchmark for comparison in older populations with
cognitive communicative impairments.
It is important to understand behavior in the context of real-life experience. This notion
is made even more poignant when assessing frontal lobe function due to the elusive nature
of the behaviors, its resistance to assessment, and the possible impact exerted on everyday
function (Delis et al. 2001; Grafman and Litvan 1999; Royall et al. 2002). Grafman and
Litvan (1999) proposes that experimental tasks may hold the greatest promise for exploring
these most complex of behaviors due to their close association with real-life activities. It is
in this light that the assessment of story grammar presents as a sensitive and ecologically
valid way to explore the workings of the frontal lobe networks and managerial knowledge
behaviors.
Appendix: Appendix A & B—Transcripts
Appendix A
Example transcripts demonstrating differences in the proportion of T-units within episode

structure (TUP-R) from a younger (A) and older (B) participant in the story retelling condition.
A. Twenty year old male retelling of the “Carl” story

1. this is a story about this lady who’s going out (S)
2. and she leaves her dog at home to watch over her baby (S & I.E.)
3. and the dog helps the baby get out of the crib (I.E.)
4. and they go all-around house having fun (I.E.)
5. and go into the room jump on the bed (A)
6. and they go downstairs to the fish tank (A)
7. and listen to the stereo (A)
8. and the dogs dancing (A)
9. and they go to the refrigerator (A)
10. and have a little food (A)
11. pretty much cause a lot of trouble (D.C.)
12. then the dog cleans everything up (D.C. & I.E.)
13. gives the baby a bath (A)
14. makes the bed (A)
15. puts everything away (A)
16. throws all the food away that they didn’t use (A)
17. and then puts the baby back in the crib (D.C.)
18. and lady gets back home (I.E.)
19. and everything looks in order (A)
20. and she doesn’t know anything happened (A & D.C.)
21. and rewards the dog by petting him (D.C. & R)
123
Number of T-units = 21, 3 complete episodes, 100 % of T-units within episode structure
(1.0 - TUP-R)
B. Eighty four year old male retelling of the “Carl” story
1.this is a story about a mother that had to leave the house (S & I.E.)
2.and has told the dog to babysit for the baby (S & I.E.)
3.and gave the dog the instructions (S)
4.and after she had left all things sort of broke loose (S & I.E.)
5.I can’t believe there wasn’t any destruction (N.E.)
6.And they seem to like each other (N.E.)
7.and apparently the mother had strong faith in the dog that the dog would keep every-
thing under control (N.E.)
8. and apparently they may have deviated a certain respect but not much of any damage
was occurred (N.E.)
9. and when the dog saw the mom coming back home they both restored everything the
way it should be (A)
10. and it seemed as though everything went according to the instructions from the mother
(D.C. & R)
Number of T-units = 10, 1 complete episode, 60 % of T-units within episode structure
(0.6—TUP-R)
Numbers indicate t-unit segmentation; Story Grammar markers are labeled—S setting,
I.E. initiating event, A attempt, D.C. direct consequence, R resolution, or N.E. non-episodic.
Appendix B
Example transcript demonstrating differences in the number of complete episodes generated

(COMP-G) from a younger (A) and older (B) participant in the story generation condition.
A. Twenty year old female generating a “Runaway” story
1. this is a story about a little boy who wants to Runaway (S)
2. standing in the kitchen very upset he looks at mother and says that’s it I’m running
away (S & I.E.)
3. so the little boy takes his all his prized possessions his teddy bears and his toys and
puts them into a sheet (A)
4. and he goes outside (A)
5. finds a stick (A)
6. ties it all up (A)
7. and says that’s it I’m running way (D.C.)
8. walking down the street (down the street) decides I am hungry mama didn’t give me
a lunch yet (S & I.E.)
9. so he goes into the local counter (I.E. & A)
10. and he sits on the counter (A)
11. and says alright this is what I would like I would like a grilled cheese please no crust
(D.C.)
12. and a police officer is a right next to him and he says Sir you look a little bit young
to be here all by yourself (I.E.)
13. and he says nope I’m running away I am all by myself from now on (S & I.E.)
14. and he says well why are you running away (A)
15. and he says well mom wont let me have a dog (S & A)
123
16. and so the police officer talks to him (A)

17. and the guy running the counter talks to him (A)
18. and they decide after the the police officer will go talk to his mother (A)
19. and maybe he could convince her to compromise (A)
20. and even if he can’t have a dog it’s not worth running away
21. and after they eat the police officer drives him home in his cruiser to talk to his mom
(D.C.)
Number of complete episodes (COMP-G) = 3
B. Eighty two year old female generating a “Runaway” story
1. this little boy was not happy home (S)
2. so he decided to leave home (S & I.E.)
3. and he went into a restaurant (I.E.)
4. and happened to sit next to a policeman (I.E.)
5. who asked him what he was doing (A)
6. and he told him he was running away from home (S & A)
7. and the policeman told him all kinds of reasons why he should not runaway from
home (A)
8. and so (he took the little boy) the little boy understood (D.C.)
9. and had the policeman take him back to his own house (D.C. & R)
Number of complete episodes (COMP-G) = 1
Numbers indicate t-unit segmentation; Story Grammar markers are labeled—S setting,
I.E. initiating event, A attempt, D.C. direct consequence, R resolution, or N.E. non-episodic.
References
Alexander, M. P. (2006). Impairments of procedures for implementing complex language are due to disruption
of frontal attention processes. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 12(2), 236–247.
Arkin, S., & Mahendra, N. (2001). Discourse analysis of Alzheimer’s patients before and after intervention:
Methodology and outcomes. Aphasiology, 15(6), 533–569.
Ash, S., Moore, P., Antani, S., McCawley, G., Work, M., & Grossman, M. (2006). Trying to tell a tale: Discourse
impairments in progressive aphasia and frontotemporal dementia. Neurology, 66(9), 1405–1413.
Ash, S., Moore, P., Vesely, L., Gunawardena, D., McMillan, C., Anderson, C., et al. (2009). Non-fluent speech
in frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22(4), 370–383.
Blair, M., Marczinski, C. A., Davis-Faroque, N., & Kertesz, A. (2007). A longitudinal study of language decline
in Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. Journal of the International Neuropsychological
Society, 13(2), 237–245.
Borgen, F. H., & Barnett, D. C. (1987). Applying cluster analysis in counseling psychology research. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 34(4), 456–468.
Brookshire, B. L., Chapman, S. B., Song, J., & Levin, H. S. (2000). Cognitive and linguistic correlates
of children’s discourse after closed head injury: A three-year follow-up. Journal of the International
Neuropsychological Society, 6(7), 741–751.
Cannizzaro, M. S., & Coelho, C. A. (2002). Treatment of story grammar following traumatic brain injury: A
pilot study. Brain Injury, 16(12), 1065–1073.
Cannizzaro, M. S., Dumas, J., Prelock, P. P., & Newhouse, P. (2012). Organizational structure reduces process-
ing load in the prefrontal cortex during discourse processing: Implications for cognitively based commu-
nication impairments. In Perspectives on neurophysiology and neurogenic speech and language disorders
(forthcoming).
Capilouto, G., Wright, H., & Wagovich, S. (2005). CIU and main event analyses of the structured discourse
of older and younger adults. Journal of Communication Disorders, 38(6), 431–444.
Chapman, S. B., Zientz, J., Weiner, M., Rosenberg, R., Frawley, W., & Burns, M. H. (2002). Discourse changes
in early Alzheimer disease, mild cognitive impairment, and normal aging. Alzheimer Disease & Associated
Disorders, 16(3), 177–186.
123
Coelho, C. (2007). Management of discourse deficits following traumatic brain injury: Progress, caveats, and
needs. Seminars in Speech and Language, 2, 122–135.
Coelho, C. A. (1998). Analysis of story grammar. In L. R. Cherney (Ed.), Analyzing discourse in communica-
tively impaired adults (pp. 115–122). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers.
Coelho, C. A. (2002). Story narratives of adults with closed head injury and non-brain-injured adults: Influence
of socioeconomic status, elicitation task, and executive functioning. ournal of Speech, Language and
Hearing Research, 45(6), 1232–1248.
Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., & Duffy, R. J. (1990). Contextual influences on narrative discourse in normal
young adults. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 19(6), 405–420.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
Cooper, P. V. (1990). Discourse production and normal aging: Performance on oral picture description tasks.
Journal of Gerontology, 45, 210–214.
Crozier, S., Sirigu, A., LehÈricy, S., van de Moortele, P.-F., Pillon, B., Grafman, J., et al. (1999). Distinct
prefrontal activations in processing sequence at the sentence and script level: An fMRI study. Neuropsy-
chologia, 37(13), 1469–1476.
Day, A. (1985). Good dog, carl. New York: Scholastic.
Delis, D. C., Kaplan, E., & Kramer, J. H. (2001). Delis-Kaplan executive function system. Psychological
Corporation.
Fleming, V. (2009). Discourse comprehension and aging: The mediating effects of executive function. In
Clinical aphasiology conference, Keystone, CO, May 26–30, 2009.
Gaesser, B., Sacchetti, D. C., Addis, D. R., & Schacter, D. L. (2010). Characterizing age-related changes in
remembering the past and imagining the future. (No Pagination Specified). Psychology and Aging .
Glosser, G., & Deser, T. (1992). A comparison of changes in macrolinguistic and microlinguistic aspects of
discourse production in normal aging. Journal of Gerontology, 47, 266–272.
Gordon, P. C. (1993). Computational and psychological models of discourse. In H. H. Brownell & Y. Joanette
(Eds.), Narrative discourse in neurologically impaired and normal aging adults (pp. 23–46). San Diego,
CA: Singular Publishing Group.
Grafman, J. (1989). Plans actions and mental sets: Managerial knowledge units in the frontal lobes. In E.
Perecman (Ed.), Integrating theory and practice in clinical neuropsychology (pp. 93–138). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Grafman, J. (1993). Damage to the prefrontal cortex leads to decomposition of structured event complexes.
Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 8, 73–87.
Grafman, J. (1995). Similarities and distinctions among current models of prefrontal cortical functions. In K. J.
Holyoak & F. B. J. Grafman (Eds.), Structure and functions of the human prefrontal cortex (pp. 337–368).
New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Grafman, J. (2006). Human prefrontal cortex: Processes and representations. In J. Risberg & J. Grafman (Eds.),
The frontal lobes: Development, function and, pathology (pp. 69–91). London, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Grafman, J., & Krueger, F. (2008). The prefrontal cortex stores structured event complexes that are the rep-
resentational basis for cognitively derived actions. In E. Morsella, J. A. Bargh & P. M. Gollwitzer (Eds.),
Oxford handbook of human action (Vol. 2). Oxford University Press.
Grafman, J., & Litvan, I. (1999). Importance of deficits in executive functions. The Lancet, 354(9194), 1921–
1923.
Green, S., & Salkind, N. (2003). Using SPSS for windows and macintosh: Analyzing and understanding:
Upper Saddle River. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Heller, R. B., & Dobbs, A. R. (1993). Age differences in word finding in discourse and nondiscourse situations.
Psychology of Aging, 8, 443–450.
Juncos-Rabadàn, O., Pereiro, A. X., & Rodrìguez, M. S. (2005). Narrative speech in aging: Quantity, infor-
mation content, and cohesion. Brain and Language, 95(3), 423–434.
Krueger, F., Moll, J., Zahn, R., Heinecke, A., & Grafman, J. (2007). Event frequency modulates the processing
of daily life activities in human medial prefrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 17(10), 2346–2353.
Le Dorze, G., & BÉDard, C. (1998). Effects of age and education on the lexico-semantic content of connected
speech in adults. Journal of Communication Disorders, 31(1), 53–71.
Le, K., Coelho, C., Mozeiko, J., & Grafman, J. (2011). Measuring goodness of story narratives. Journal of
Speech, Language and Hearing Reserch, 54(1), 118–126.
Lehman Blake, M. (2006). Clinical relevance of discourse characteristics after right hemisphere brain damage.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15(3), 255–267.
Lezak, M. D., Howieson, D. B., & Loring, D. W. (2004). Executive functions and motor performance. In
Neuropsychological assessment, 4th Ed. (pp. 611–646). New York: Oxford University Press.
123
Liles, B. Z. (1985). Production and comprehension of narrative discourse in normal and language disordered
children. Journal of Communication Disorders, 18, 409–427.
Liles, B. Z., Coelho, C. A., Duffy, R. J., & Zalagens, M. R. (1989). Effects of elicitation procedures on the
narratives of normal and closed head-injured adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54(3), 356.
Liles, B. Z., Duffy, R. J., Merritt, D. D., & Purcell, S. L. (1995). Measurement of narrative discourse ability
in children with language disorders. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 38(2), 415–425.
MacKenzie, C. (2000). Adult spoken discourse: The influences of age and education. International Journal
of Language & Communication Disorders, 35, 269–285.
Mandler, J. M., & Johnson, N. S. (1977). Remembrance of things parsed: Story structure and recall. Cognitive
Psychology, 9, 111–151.
Mar, R. A. (2004). The neuropsychology of narrative: Story comprehension, story production and their inter-
relation. Neuropsychologia, 42(10), 1414–1434.
Marini, A., Boewe, A., Caltagirone, C., & Carlomagno, S. (2005). Age-related differences in the production
of textual descriptions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34(5), 439–463.
McCabe, A., & Bliss, L. S. (2006). Struggling to make sense: Patterns of impairment in adult narrative
discourse. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 25(4), 321–336.
McCabe, A., & Peterson, C. (1984). What makes a good story? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 13,
457–480.
McGinnis, D. (2009). Text comprehension products and processes in young, young-old, and old-old adults.
The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 64B(2), 202–211.
McGinnis, D., Goss, R. J., Tessmer, C., & Zelinski, E. M. (2008). Inference generation in young, young-old and
old-old adults: Evidence for semantic architecture stability. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(2), 171–192.
Merritt, D. D., & Liles, B. Z. (1989). Narrative analysis: Clinical applications of story generation and story
retelling. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54(3), 438–447.
Miller, L. (2009). Age differences in the effects of domain knowledge on reading efficiency. Psychology and
Aging, 24(1), 63.
Milligan, G. W., & Cooper, M. C. (1987). Methodology review: Clustering methods. Applied Psychological
Measurement, 11(4), 329–354.
Motes, M. A., Biswal, B. B., & Rypma, B. (2011). Age-dependent relationships between prefrontal cortex
activation and processing efficiency. Cognitive Neuroscience, 2(1), 1–10.
Murphy, D., Daneman, M., & Schneider, B. (2006). Why do older adults have difficulty following conversa-
tions? Psychology and Aging, 21(1), 49.
Murray, L. L., & Stout, J. C. (1999). Discourse comprehension in huntington’s and parkinson’s diseases.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 8(2), 137–148.
Noh, S., Shake, M., Parisi, J., Joncich, A., Morrow, D., & Stine-Morrow, E. (2007). Age differences in learning
from text: The effects of content preexposure on reading. International Journal of Behavioral Development,
31(2), 133.
Noh, S. R., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. L. (2009). Age differences in tracking characters during narrative compre-
hension. Memory & Cognition, 37(6), 769–778.
North, A. J., Ulatowska, H. K., Macaluso-Haynes, S., & Bell, H. (1986). Discourse performance in older
adults. International Journal of Ageing and Developmen, 23, 267–283.
Obler, L. K., Au, R., Kugler, J., Melvold, J., Tocco, M., & Albert, M. A. (1994). Intersubject variability in
adult normal discourse. In R. L. Bloom (Ed.), Discourse analysis and applications studies in adult clinical
populations (pp. 15–27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Partiot, A., Grafman, J., Sadato, N., Flitman, S., & Wild, K. (1996). Brain activation during script event
processing. Neuroreport, 7, 761–766.
Peelle, J. E., & Grossman, M. (2008). Language processing in frontotemporal dementia: A brief review.
Language and Linguistics Compass, 2(1), 18–35.
Roelofs, A., & Hagoort, P. (2002). Control of language use: Cognitive modeling of the hemodynamics of
stroop task performance. Cognitive Brain Research, 15(1), 85–97.
Royall, D. R., Lauterbach, E. C., Cummings, J. L., Reeve, A., Rummans, T. A., Kaufer, D. I., et al. (2002).
Executive control function: A review of its promise and challenges for clinical research. A report from the
committee on research of the American neuropsychiatric association. Journal of Neuropsychiatry Clinical
Neuroscience, 14(4), 377–405.
SAS, J. (2007). JMP software: Release 7.0. 1. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
Schneider, P., & Winship, S. (2002). Adults’ judgments of fictional story quality. Journal of Speech, Language
and Hearing Research, 45(2), 372–383.
Shadden, B. B. (1998). Information analysis. In L. R. Cherney (Ed.), Analyzing discourse in communicatively
impaired adults (pp. 35–63). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers.
123
Shewan, C. M., & Henderson, V. L. (1988). Analysis of spontaneous language in the older normal population.
Journal of Communication Disorders, 21(2), 139–154.
Sirigu, A., Cohen, L., Zalla, T., Pradat-Diehl, P., Van Eeckhout, P., & Grafman, J. (1998). Distinct frontal
regions for processing sentence syntax and story grammar. Cortex, 34(5), 771–778.
Sirigu, A., Zalla, T., Pillon, B., Grafman, J., Agid, Y., & Dubois, B. (1996). Encoding of sequence and
boundaries of scripts following prefrontal lesions. Cortex, 32(2), 297–310.
Ska, B., Scherer, L. C., Fôlres, O. C., Oliveira, C. R., Netto, T. M., & Fonseca, R. P. (2009). Theoretical,
behavioral and neuroimage evidence on discourse processing aging. Psychology & Neuroscience, 2, 101–
109.
Stein, N. L., & Glenn, C. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In R.
O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (pp. 53–120). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Stemmer, B. (1999). Discourse studies in neurologically impaired populations: A quest for action. Brain and
Language, 68(3), 402–418.
Tisserand, D., & Jolles, J. (2003). Special issue on the involvement of prefrontal networks in cognitive ageing.
Cortex, 39, 1107–1128.
Tucker, F. M., & Hanlon, R. E. (1998). Effects of mild traumatic brain injury on narrative discourse production.
Brain Injury, 12(9), 783–792.
Tye-Murray, N., Sommers, M., Spehar, B., Myerson, J., Hale, S., & Rose, N. (2008). Auditory-visual discourse
comprehension by older and young adults in favorable and unfavorable conditions. International Journal
of Audiology, 47(S2), 31–37.
Ulatowska, H. K., Hayashi, M. M., Cannito, M. P., & Fleming, S. G. (1986). Disruption of reference in aging.
Brain and Language, 28(1), 24–41.
Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler adult intelligence scale-III (WAIS-III). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological
Corporation.
Wlotko, E., Lee, C., & Federmeier, K. (2010). Language of the aging brain: Event-related potential studies of
comprehension in older adults. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4(8), 623–638.
Wood, J. N., & Grafman, J. (2003). Human prefrontal cortex: Processing and representational perspectives.
Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(2), 139–147.
Wood, J. N., Knutson, K. M., & Grafman, J. (2005). Psychological structure and neural correlates of event
knowledge. Cerebral Cortex, 15(8), 1155–1161.
Wright, H. H., Capilouto, G. J., Srinivasan, C., & Fergadiotis, G. (2011). Story processing ability in cognitively
healthy younger and older adults. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 54(3), 900.
Ylvisaker, M. (2003). Context-sensitive cognitive rehabilitation after brain injury: Theory and practice. Brain
Impairment, 4(1), 1–16.
Ylvisaker, M., Szekeres, S., & Feeney, T. (2001). Communication disorders associated with traumatic brain
injury. In R. Chapey (Ed.), Language intervention strategies in aphasia and related neurogenic communi-
cation disorders (4th ed., pp. 745–807). Philladelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.
Ylvisaker, M., Szekeres, S., & Feeney, T. (2008). Communication disorders associated with traumatic brain
injury. In R. Chapey (Ed.), Language intervention strategies in aphasia and related neurogenic communi-
cation disorders (5th ed., pp. 879–962). Philladelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.
Zalla, T., Sirigu, A., Pillon, B., Dubois, B., Grafman, J., & Agid, Y. (1998). Deficit in evaluating pre-
determinated sequences of script events in patients with parkinson’s disease. Cortex, 34(4), 621–627.
123
View publication stats

Cannizzaro Coelho

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cannizzaro Coelho

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Analysis of narrative discourse structure as an ecologically relevant measure

Article in Journal of Psycholinguistic Research · January 2013

Michael Steven Cannizzaro Carl A Coelho

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Rehabilitation of Narrative Language and Discourse View project

Discourse following TBI View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Analysis of Narrative Discourse Structure

Michael S. Cannizzaro · Carl A. Coelho

Published online: 29 November 2012

Keywords Narrative discourse · Executive function · Age · Story grammar

Story Retell Task

Table 1 Participant demographic data

N = 46 Age VIQ YRSED

Mean (SD) 56.78 (27.7) 13.04 (2.44) 16.28 (2.37)

Story Generation Task

Measures of Executive Functions

Transcription and Data Preparation

Table 2 Stein and Glenn’s (1979) story grammar identification rules

Essential episode components Types

Story Narrative Task Differences

Story Grammar Performance, Age, Verbal IQ, and Education

Table 3 Demographic, story grammar, and executive function variables

AGE 56.42 18–98 23.84

Paired differences Mean SD Std. error mean t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Age YRSED COMP-R INC-R TUP-R COMP-G INC-G TUP-G

Age −.03 .02 −.34 M −.33 M .11 −.19

Story Grammar and Linguistically-Based Executive Functions

Table 6 Correlations between story grammar & linguistic executive functions

COMP-R INC-R TUP-R COMP-G INC-G TUP-G

CAT-SWIT .27 .07 .29 .43 M −.09 .11

Story Grammar and Non-linguistic/Mixed Executive Functions

Factor Analysis of Correlated Story Grammar and Executive Function Variables

Table 7 Correlations between story grammar and non-linguistic executive functions

COMP-R INC-R TUP-R COMP-G INC-G TUP-G

DF-SWIT −.12 −.24 −.07 .37 M −.20 .10

Variable name (percent of variance accounted) Factor 1 Factor 2

more appropriately compared to an older profile of typical narrative behavior as suggested

Story Retell and TUP-R

Story Generation and COMP-G

Age and SG Correlations

non-episode content in the older participants performance. However, further investigation of

Relationship Between Story Grammar Performance and Executive Functions

Factor Analysis and SEC Knowledge

Summary of Behavior Factors Under the Managerial Knowledge Framework

Appendix: Appendix A & B—Transcripts

Example transcripts demonstrating differences in the proportion of T-units within episode

A. Twenty year old male retelling of the “Carl” story

Example transcript demonstrating differences in the number of complete episodes generated

16. and so the police officer talks to him (A)

You might also like