hh.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 17 of 17
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Asker-Arnason, Lena
    et al.
    Lund Univ, Dept Logoped Phoniatr & Audiol, Lund, Sweden..
    Akerlund, Viktoria
    Lund Univ, Dept Logoped Phoniatr & Audiol, Lund, Sweden..
    Skoglund, Cecilia
    Helsingborg Hosp, Dept Logoped, Helsingborg, Sweden..
    Ek-Lagergren, Ingela
    Lund Univ, Dept Logoped Phoniatr & Audiol, Lund, Sweden..
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Halmstad University, School of Health and Welfare, Centre of Research on Welfare, Health and Sport (CVHI).
    Sahlen, Birgitta
    Lund Univ, Lund, Sweden..
    Spoken and Written Narratives in Swedish Children and Adolescents With Hearing Impairment2012In: Communication Disorders Quarterly, ISSN 1525-7401, E-ISSN 1538-4837, Vol. 33, no 3, p. 131-145Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Twenty 10-to 18-year-old children and adolescents with varying degrees of hearing impairment (HI) and hearing aids (HA), ranging from mild-moderate to severe, produced picture-elicited narratives in a spoken and written version. Their performance was compared to that of 63 normally hearing (NH) peers within the same age span. The participants with HI and NH showed similar patterns regarding intragroup correlations between corresponding measures of spoken and written narratives. However, the participants with HI had significantly less diverse language than the NH group. The participants with poorer hearing (higher best ear hearing level [BEHL]) produced spoken and written narratives comprising more content words and they also produced written narratives that were less lexically diverse than the participants with better hearing (lower BEHL). The difference as to lexical skills emphasizes the importance of focusing on these skills in the group of children with HI. However, the results give support for a quite optimistic view on the development of narration in children with HI with HA, at least for picture-elicited narratives.

  • 2.
    Asker-Arnason, Lena
    et al.
    Section of Logopedics, Phoniatrics and Audiology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Centre for Languages and Literature, Department of Linguistics, Lund University.
    Sahlén, Birgitta
    Section of Logopedics, Phoniatrics and Audiology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University.
    Process and product in writing: A methodological contribution to the assessment of written narratives in 8-12 year old Swedish children using ScriptLog2008In: Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology, ISSN 1401-5439, Vol. 33, no 3, p. 143-152Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Twenty-seven children, with typical language development (TLD), 8-10 years old and 10-12 years old, were assessed with keystroke-logging in order to investigate their narrative writing. Measures of the writing process and the written product were used. One purpose was to explore how children produce written narratives in on-line production, and to relate the writing process to the written product. The results showed that those children who produced the final text faster, also wrote stories that comprised of more words. In the group of older children, children with better narrative ability used less pause time than those with worse ability, and the girls were faster writers than the boys. We believe that keystroke-logging gives valuable information for the assessment of young children's writing and that it is a potentially valid assessment tool for children from about 10 years of age.

  • 3.
    Asker-Árnason, Lena
    et al.
    Lund University.
    Ibertsson, Tina
    Lund University.
    Wass, Malin
    Linköping University.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Lund University.
    Sahlén, Birgitta
    Lund University.
    Picture-elicited written narratives, process and product, in 18 children with cochlear implants2010In: Communication Disorders Quarterly, ISSN 1525-7401, E-ISSN 1538-4837, Vol. 31, no 4, p. 195-212Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The purpose of the study was to explore the narrative writing of 18 children, ages 11 to 19, with severe and profound hearing impairment who had cochlear implants (CI), compared with the performance of hearing children. Nine of the 18 children had prelingual deafness and 9 children had postlingual deafness. The hearing impairment was progressive in 11 children. The participants thus formed a heterogeneous group, which was split in two ways: according to age at testing and age at implantation. The narratives were collected by means of keystroke logging. The difference between the children with CI and the hearing children was most prominent for two measures: the percentage of pause time (in the group of children older than 13 years) and lexical density. Furthermore, the children implanted after 5 years of age performed more like the hearing children. This group consisted of children with postlingual deafness and also of children who were deafened progressively. Our interpretation is that these children benefited from the early linguistic input. Taking the whole group of participants into consideration, the results reflect linguistic and cognitive processing limitations in complex linguistic tasks like narration for the children with CI in comparison with their hearing peers.

  • 4.
    Behrns, Ingrid
    et al.
    Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Division of Speech and Language Pathology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Ahlsén, Elisabeth
    Department of Linguistics, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Centre for Languages and Literature, Linguistics, Lund University, Sweden.
    Aphasia and text writing2010In: International journal of language and communication disorders, ISSN 1368-2822, E-ISSN 1460-6984, Vol. 45, no 2, p. 230-243Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Background:

    Good writing skills are needed in almost every aspect of life today, and there is a growing interest in research into acquired writing difficulties. Most of the findings reported so far, however, are based on words produced in isolation. The present study deals with the production of entire texts.

    Aims:

    The aim was to characterize written narratives produced by a group of participants with aphasia.

    Methods & Procedures:

    Eight persons aged 28–63 years with aphasia took part in the study. They were compared with a reference group consisting of ten participants aged 21–30 years. All participants were asked to write a personal narrative titled ‘I have never been so afraid’ and to perform a picture-based story-generation task called the ‘Frog Story’. The texts were written on a computer.

    Outcome & Results:

    The group could be divided into participants with low, moderate, and high general performance, respectively. The texts written by the participants in the group with moderate and high writing performance had comparatively good narrative structure despite indications of difficulties on other linguistic levels.

    Conclusions & Implications:

    Aphasia appeared to influence text writing on different linguistic levels. The impact on overall structure and coherence was in line with earlier findings from the analysis of spoken and written discourse and the implication of this is that the written modality should also be included in language rehabilitation.

  • 5.
    Behrns, Ingrid
    et al.
    Göteborgs universitet.
    Ahlsén, Elisabeth
    Göteborgs universitet.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Lund University.
    Aphasia and the Process of Revision in Writing a Text2008In: Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, ISSN 0269-9206, E-ISSN 1464-5076, Vol. 22, no 2, p. 95-110Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Most of the previous research on aphasia and writing ability concentrates on the production of words in isolation. The purpose of the current study was to examine the process of producing written texts by clients with aphasia. By using keystroke logging, it was possible to analyse the participants' ongoing work during text writing. Results showed that the participants with aphasia composed their texts in what may be described as a linear way. Edits concerning syntax or text structure were almost absent in the subjects' data, but they spent much time and effort on revising smaller units of text, that is, letters and words, possibly as a result of changing their minds or not being able to realize their intentions. However, these changes did not always result in correctly written words in the final text. The findings are discussed in relation to current writing theories.

  • 6.
    Behrns, Ingrid
    et al.
    University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Hartelius, Lena
    University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Lund University, Sweden.
    Aphasia and Computerised Writing Aid Supported Treatment2009In: Aphasiology, ISSN 0268-7038, E-ISSN 1464-5041, Vol. 23, no 10, p. 1276-1294Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Background:

    Individuals with aphasia often experience difficulties in writing. Word processors with a spell checker and a grammar checker can compensate for some of the writing difficulties associated with aphasia.

    Aims:

    To determine if writing difficulties associated with aphasia may be reduced by the use of a computerised writing aid when training patients.

    Methods & Procedures:

    The writing aids used in this study were originally designed specifically for persons with developmental reading and writing difficulties and are based on statistics of frequent misspellings and phonotactic rules. Three participants with aphasia selected one of two offered writing aids. Written production during treatment and evaluation was recorded and analysed by keystroke logging. The study had a single-subject ABA design replicated across three participants. The baseline (A) was established by measuring four dependent variables. During a 9-week intervention phase (B) the dependent variables were measured once a week. A follow-up (A) was done 10 months after the training was finished. The dependent variables were: total number of words in a writing task; proportion of correctly written words; words per minute; proportion of successful edits. The results were analysed both visually and by statistical calculations.

    Outcomes & Results:

    All participants experienced a positive improvement in their writing ability. Results showed individual differences; after completed training the first participant made more successful edits, the second wrote more words, had a larger proportion of correctly written words, and made more successful edits. The third participant's results did not show any improvement that could be statistically supported.

    Conclusions:

    This study showed that the computerised training facilitated the generating process and made the revision process more efficient for the participants. The results are important in that they indicate possible ways of designing writing treatment. However, they also show the need for careful analyses when evaluating different treatment strategies and in discussing what improved writing ability may be.

  • 7.
    Behrns, Ingrid
    et al.
    University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Broberg, Malin
    University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Hartelius, Lena
    University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
    A comparison between written and spoken narratives in aphasia2009In: Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, ISSN 0269-9206, E-ISSN 1464-5076, Vol. 23, no 7, p. 507-528Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The aim of the present study was to explore how a personal narrative told by a group of eight persons with aphasia differed between written and spoken language, and to compare this with findings from 10 participants in a reference group. The stories were analysed through holistic assessments made by 60 participants without experience of aphasia and through measurement of lexical and syntactic variables. The findings showed that the participants with aphasia generally received lower ratings than the reference group, but also that stories written by participants with aphasia were rated as easier to understand, more interesting, and more coherent than the group’s spoken stories. Regression analysis showed that syntax could predict several of the rated variables for the stories told by the participants with aphasia. Results point to the need to include writing training in language rehabilitation in order to increase the ability for persons with aphasia to participate in communicative situations in everyday life.

  • 8.
    Johansson, Roger
    et al.
    Lunds universitet.
    Johansson, Victoria
    Lunds universitet.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Lunds universitet.
    Se upp och vinn tid!2008In: Språktidningen : tidningen som bevakar och bejakar språket, ISSN 1654-5028, no 1, p. 20-21Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [sv]

    Den som mest tittar på tangenterna skriver långsammare än den som tittar på skärmen. Har blickens riktning också effekt på textens kvalitet?

    Var tittar du när du skriver? På tangenterna eller på skärmen? Vissa skribenter tittar mest på tangentbordet och vissa tittar mest på skärmen, men nästan alla tittar på tangentbordet ibland. Frågan är om det spelar någon roll för hur texten blir i slutändan.

    Vår forskargrupp i Lund beslöt att undersöka saken. Vi lät 28 studenter (utan läs- och skrivsvårigheter) skriva en text i ett program som spelade in alla tangentnedslag som gjordes under skrivandet. Samtidigt registrerade vi vad studenterna tittade på med hjälp av en ögonrörelsemätare fäst på en cykelhjälm.

    En första analys visade att skribenterna kunde delas in i två grupper: en som mest tittade på skärmen och en som mest tittade på tangentbordet. Vi kallar den första gruppen för skärmtittare och den andra för tangentbordstittare.

  • 9.
    Johansson, Roger
    et al.
    Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University, Box 201, 221 00 Lund, Sweden.
    Johansson, Victoria
    Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
    Holmqvist, Kenneth
    Humanities Laboratory, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
    Looking at the keyboard or the monitor: relationship with text production processes2010In: Reading and writing, ISSN 0922-4777, E-ISSN 1573-0905, Vol. 23, no 7, p. 835-851Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper we explored text production differences in an expository text production task between writers who looked mainly at the keyboard and writers who looked mainly at the monitor. Eye-tracking technology and keystroke-logging were combined to systematically describe and define these two groups in respect of the complex interplay between text production and the reading of one's own emerging text. Findings showed that monitor gazers typed significantly faster and were more productive writers. They also read their own text more, and they frequently read in parallel with writing. Analysis of fixation durations suggests that more cognitive processing is in use during reading in parallel with writing than during reading in pauses. Keyboard gazers used the left and right cursor keys significantly more. We suggest that this is because they revised their texts in a much more serial mode than monitor gazers. Finally, analysis of the characteristics of the final texts showed no differences between the groups.

  • 10.
    Kjellman, Cecilia
    et al.
    Halmstad University, School of Health and Welfare, Centre of Research on Welfare, Health and Sport (CVHI).
    Högdin, Sara
    Halmstad University, School of Health and Welfare, Centre of Research on Welfare, Health and Sport (CVHI).
    Tideman, Magnus
    Halmstad University, School of Health and Welfare, Centre of Research on Welfare, Health and Sport (CVHI).
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Halmstad University, School of Health and Welfare, Centre of Research on Welfare, Health and Sport (CVHI).
    Everyday life for young adults with intellectual disabilities in public and private spaces2012In: Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, ISSN 0964-2633, E-ISSN 1365-2788, Vol. 56, no 7-8, p. 810-810Article in journal (Other academic)
  • 11.
    Torrance, Mark
    et al.
    Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
    Writers' eye movements2010In: Traditions of writing research / [ed] C. Bazerman, R. Krut, K. Lunsford, S. McLeod, S. Null, P. Rogers & A. Stansell, New York: Routledge, 2010, p. 394-405Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 12.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Lunds universitet, Lund, Sverige.
    Den komplexa skrivprocessen2008In: Läsning : medlemsblad för SCIRA - den svenska riksorganisationen för läsundervisning och läsforskning, ISSN 0349-9855, Vol. 33, no 1, p. 8-11Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 13.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Lunds universitet, Lund, Sverige.
    Några kvantitativa anlyser av Språkrums forskningsmaterial2008In: Rum för språkutveckling / [ed] Gun Oker-Blom, Annika Westerholm, Nina Österholm, Helsingfors: Utbildningsstyrelsen , 2008, p. 115-134Chapter in book (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 14.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    Halmstad University, School of Social and Health Sciences (HOS), Centre of Research on Welfare, Health and Sport (CVHI).
    The disabling state of an active society2011In: Disability & Society, ISSN 0968-7599, E-ISSN 1360-0508, Vol. 26, no 3, p. 381-383Article, book review (Refereed)
  • 15.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    et al.
    University of Lund, Lund, Sweden.
    Leijten, Marielle
    University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
    Van Waes, Luuk
    University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
    Studying reading during writing: new perspectives in research2010In: Reading and writing, ISSN 0922-4777, E-ISSN 1573-0905, Vol. 23, no 7, p. 735-742Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 16.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    et al.
    Lunds universitet, Lund, Sverige.
    Strömqvist, Sven
    Lunds universitet, Lund, Sverige.
    Från tanke till text hos personer med och utan läs- och skrivsvårigheter2008In: Dyslexi : aktuellt om läs- och skrivsvårigheter, ISSN 1401-2480, Vol. 13, no 3, p. 18-21Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 17.
    Wengelin, Åsa
    et al.
    Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
    Torrance, Mark
    Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
    Holmqvist, Kenneth
    Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
    Simpson, Sol
    SR Research Ltd, Osgoode, ON, Canada.
    Galbraith, David
    Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom.
    Johansson, Victoria
    Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
    Johansson, Roger
    Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
    Combined eyetracking and keystroke-logging methods for studying cognitive processes in text production2009In: Behavior Research Methods, ISSN 1554-351X, E-ISSN 1554-3528, Vol. 41, no 2, p. 337-351Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Writers typically spend a certain proportion of time looking back over the text that they have written. This is likely to serve a number of different functions, which are currently poorly understood. In this article, we present two systems, ScriptLog + TimeLine and EyeWrite, that adopt different and complementary approaches to exploring this activity by collecting and analyzing combined eye movement and keystroke data from writers composing extended texts. ScriptLog + TimeLine is a system that is based on an existing keystroke-logging program and uses heuristic, pattern-matching methods to identify reading episodes within eye movement data. EyeWrite is an integrated editor and analysis system that permits identification of the words that the writer fixates and their location within the developing text. We demonstrate how the methods instantiated within these systems can be used to make sense of the large amount of data generated by eyetracking and keystroke logging in order to inform understanding of the cognitive processes that underlie written text production.

1 - 17 of 17
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf