本研究比較三組不同腦傷類型患者—創傷性腦傷組、右腦傷組、左腦傷組與正常組在連環圖作業上的排序能力,並蒐集根據排序所作情節敘述的語言樣本分別在語句完整性以及切題性、因果連貫、涵意推論三個「組織」相關向度上評分。結果顯示(1)三個腦傷組的連環圖排序能力無顯著差異,但均顯著較正常組為弱;(2)創傷組和右腦傷組的反應組型非常相似,兩者在五個評分向度上的量化資料幾無顯著差距;(3)創傷組和右腦傷組的語句完整性和正常組無顯著差異,但切題性、因果連貫、和涵意推論顯著弱於正常組;(4)左腦傷組所有評分向度均顯著弱於正常組、創傷組、和右腦傷組。由此可知,表面語法完整而常被認為沒有語言障礙的創傷型腦傷和右腦傷患者,事實上在主題知覺、因果連貫、和涵義推論上與正常組有顯著差異,溝通功能仍屬異常。
A series of picture arrangement tasks were administered in order to elicit script-like discourses on normal and three different types of brain-damaged subjects-traumatic brain-injured, right hemisphere disordered and left hemisphere disordered. Arrangement accuracy, syntactic intactness as well as three organizational indicators of verbatim-relevancy, coherence and implication were compared. Results showed that (1)all three brain-damaged groups were significantly curtailed compared with normal controls, (2)the traumatic brain-injured group and the right-hemisphere disordered group were almost alike in descriptive performance qualitatively and quantitatively, (3)the traumatic brain-injured and the right-hemisphere disordered groups were significantly impaired on relevancy, coherence and implication though their . utterances were intact syntactically, (4) the left-hemisphere disordered group performed significantly impaired on all indicators when compared with the other two brain-damaged groups and the normal subjects. These results suggest that even though patients with brain damages can produce superficially 'correct' discourses, the underlying structures associated with contextual organization characteristics might stil1 be . compromised.