Differences in pragmatic communication skills of adults with intellectual disabilities and dual diagnoses.

Mirjana Djordjevic, Nenad Glumbić, Branislav Brojčin, Slobodan Banković, Vesna Žunić Pavlović
Author Information
  1. Mirjana Djordjevic: Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
  2. Nenad Glumbić: Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
  3. Branislav Brojčin: Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
  4. Slobodan Banković: Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
  5. Vesna Žunić Pavlović: Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.

Abstract

Introduction: Pragmatics includes a set of skills related to language structure and meaning that allow the speaker to use the language appropriately and in accordance with different communication situations. The aim of this research was to determine the differences in pragmatic communication skills of adults with intellectual disabilities, dual diagnoses, and typical development, and to determine the effects of gender, age, the level of intellectual functioning and speech comprehension on their achievements on two assessment instruments.
Methods: The sample included 180 adults (60 typically developing participants, 60 with intellectual disabilities, and 60 participants with dual diagnoses). We used two instruments to assess pragmatic communication skills - Communication Checklist - Adult, CC-A, and the Assessment Battery for Communication, ABaCo. In order to test the differences between the three groups of participants, we used canonical discriminant analysis.
Results: Discriminant analysis revealed two significant canonical functions. Function one (speech comprehension and the level of intellectual disability, social engagement, and paralinguistic scale) differentiates between typically developing participants and participants with dual diagnoses the most. The second canonical function (language structure, linguistic scale, paralinguistic scale, extralinguistic scale, and context scale) differentiates between participants with intellectual disabilities and participants with dual diagnoses the most. According to the results, age did not affect pragmatic achievements.
Discussion: Pragmatic skills are very complex, and different instruments measure different dimensions of these abilities. The results of this research lead to the conclusion that we can differentiate between the pragmatic abilities of typically developing people, people with intellectual disabilities, and those with dual diagnoses with the help of the ABaCo battery and the CC-A questionnaire.

Keywords

References

  1. Psychiatr Serv. 2000 Jul;51(7):922-4 [PMID: 10875959]
  2. Res Dev Disabil. 1995 Sep-Oct;16(5):393-414 [PMID: 8532918]
  3. Behav Sci (Basel). 2022 May 30;12(6): [PMID: 35735377]
  4. J Commun Disord. 2013 May-Jun;46(3):294-308 [PMID: 23562700]
  5. Front Psychol. 2019 Mar 19;10:570 [PMID: 30941077]
  6. Am J Ment Retard. 2001 Nov;106(6):481-502 [PMID: 11708935]
  7. Dev Sci. 2009 Jan;12(1):182-7 [PMID: 19120426]
  8. Res Dev Disabil. 2015 Jun-Jul;41-42:22-39 [PMID: 26057835]
  9. Res Dev Disabil. 2016 Jan;48:211-9 [PMID: 26625206]
  10. Schizophr Res. 2018 Feb;192:274-280 [PMID: 28438437]
  11. Behav Res Methods. 2012 Sep;44(3):845-61 [PMID: 22180102]
  12. BMC Geriatr. 2022 Aug 23;22(1):699 [PMID: 35999510]
  13. Schizophr Bull. 2006 Oct;32 Suppl 1:S44-63 [PMID: 16916889]
  14. Br J Clin Psychol. 1992 Feb;31(1):45-61 [PMID: 1559117]
  15. Am J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2021 Nov 1;126(6):439-442 [PMID: 34700345]
  16. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2009 Jul-Aug;44(4):489-510 [PMID: 19343569]
  17. Schizophr Res. 2005 Jun 15;75(2-3):225-32 [PMID: 15885514]
  18. Front Psychiatry. 2014 Sep 10;5:120 [PMID: 25309458]
  19. J Commun Disord. 2022 May-Jun;97:106196 [PMID: 35526293]
  20. Schizophr Bull. 1986;12(3):360-71 [PMID: 3764357]
  21. Brain Sci. 2022 Mar 13;12(3): [PMID: 35326341]
  22. J Commun Disord. 1989 Apr;22(2):93-104 [PMID: 2723147]
  23. Res Dev Disabil. 2020 Feb;97:103557 [PMID: 31874425]
  24. Dev Psychopathol. 2021 May 11;:1-23 [PMID: 33973504]
  25. Psychol Med. 2001 Feb;31(2):197-205 [PMID: 11232908]
  26. Psychopathology. 2002 Jan-Feb;35(1):25-7 [PMID: 12006745]
  27. Child Dev. 2010 Mar-Apr;81(2):528-39 [PMID: 20438458]
  28. J Abnorm Psychol. 2002 May;111(2):211-24 [PMID: 12003444]
  29. J Abnorm Psychol. 2006 May;115(2):351-358 [PMID: 16737399]
  30. Res Dev Disabil. 2016 Jan;48:69-78 [PMID: 26546741]
  31. Res Dev Disabil. 2015 Mar;38:18-29 [PMID: 25543997]
  32. Compr Psychiatry. 2016 Nov;71:106-120 [PMID: 27653782]
  33. NPJ Schizophr. 2021 May 24;7(1):28 [PMID: 34031425]
  34. Autism Res. 2021 May;14(5):932-945 [PMID: 33111475]
  35. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2010 Jan 1;54(1):70-80 [PMID: 20122097]
  36. Psychopathology. 2008;41(4):254-63 [PMID: 18441527]
  37. First Lang. 2008 Jan 1;28(2):182-199 [PMID: 19763249]
  38. Clin Psychol Rev. 2002 Jul;22(6):789-832 [PMID: 12214327]
  39. Clin Geriatr Med. 2013 Nov;29(4):737-52 [PMID: 24094294]
  40. Br J Clin Psychol. 2008 Sep;47(Pt 3):323-34 [PMID: 18248692]
  41. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2021 Jan;34(1):316-325 [PMID: 32734651]
  42. Brain Inj. 2018 Oct 10;:1-14 [PMID: 30303397]
  43. Res Dev Disabil. 2018 Mar;74:113-123 [PMID: 29413426]
  44. Front Psychol. 2022 Jul 08;13:884242 [PMID: 35880187]
  45. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004 Feb;5(2):87-96 [PMID: 14735112]
  46. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2020 Mar;33(2):126-138 [PMID: 31430018]
  47. Brain Lang. 2020 Dec;211:104864 [PMID: 33137591]
  48. J Autism Dev Disord. 2023 Feb;53(2):701-719 [PMID: 33515169]
  49. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2015 Jan-Feb;50(1):63-83 [PMID: 25039503]