A Comparison of Computerized and Paper-Based Language Tests With Adults With Aphasia

Abstract

Purpose This study investigated whether computers are a useful tool in the assessment of people with aphasia (PWA). Computerized and traditionally administered versions of tasks were compared to determine whether (a) the scores were equivalent, (b) the administration was comparable, (c) variables such as age affected performance, and (d) the participants' perceptions of the computerized and traditionally administered versions of the tasks were similar. Method Fifteen PWA were assessed on 2 language tasks—sentence-picture matching and grammaticality judgment—in 3 conditions: computer only, computer with the clinician present, and traditional. The participants also completed questionnaires rating aspects of each condition. Results Scores from the traditionally administered tasks were highly correlated with those from the computerized tasks, but scores from the computerized tasks were significantly lower. There was no significant difference in the time taken between the conditions. Whereas some individuals felt comfortable with the computer, overall, participants preferred the traditional assessment method or when another person was in the room. No factors were identified that predicted participants' relative performance in the computer condition. Conclusion The results suggest that PWA can be assessed using computerized versions of tasks, but that caution should be exercised when comparing scores to those collected using traditional methods, including norms. The variation in participants' opinions regarding computerized tasks suggests that this method might be more suitable for some participants than others.