Cognitive Neuropsychology and Developmental Disorders: Uncomfortable Bedfellows

Cognitive neuropsychology provides a theoretical framework and methods that can be of value in the study of developmental disorders, but the "dissociation" logic at the centre of this approach is not well suited to the developmental context. This is illustrated with examples from specific language impairment. Within the developing language system there is ample evidence for interaction between levels of representation, with modularity emerging in the course of development. This means that one typically is seeking to explain a complex pattern of associated impairments, rather than highly selective deficits. For instance, a selective impairment in auditory processing can have repercussions through the language system and may lead to distinctive syntactic deficits that are seen in written as well as spoken language. Changes in the nature of representations and in the relationships between components of a developing system mean that cross-sectional data at a single point in development may be misleading indicators of the primary deficit. Furthermore, traditional cognitive neuropsychology places a disproportionate emphasis on representational (competence) deficits, with processing (performance) deficits being relatively neglected. Methods for distinguishing these two kinds of impairment are discussed, as well as other approaches for elucidating the underlying nature of developmental disorders.     

AN EMPIRICAL APPRAISAL OF THE PRCA FOR MEASURING ORAL COMMUNICATION APPREHENSION

Since 1970 about 80% of the research on oral communication apprehension has used one of two versions of McCroskey's Personal Report of Communication Apprehension. The original 20-item PRCA was introduced for the purpose of measuring apprehension beyond the traditional public speaking context. Although the PRCA-20 is reliable, some serious criticism of it has centered on its ability to tap interpersonal behavior outcomes. In an attempt to bolster its interpersonal applicability, five “interpersonally-oriented” items were added to form the PRCA-25. The studies reported herein demonstrate that both versions fail to possess sufficient reliable variance to be applicable to contexts other than public settings. In addition, it was found that the interpersonal items are a separate component of the PRCA, and as such, do not justify being treated equal in terms of additivity and, therefore, reduce the construct integrity of the PRCA.