Event Abstract

Back to Event

Figurative language and aggression after traumatic brain injury: Does sarcasm in spoken language have a role in modulating aggressive behaviour?

Joanne M. Allen1* and Ekaterini Klepousniotou2
  • 1 University of Leeds, Clinical Psychology Training Programme, United Kingdom
  • 2 University of Leeds, School of Psychology, United Kingdom

BACKGROUND: Aggressive behaviour after traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been associated with language impairments (e.g. Alderman, 2007), though the language impairments identified have been discussed very generally to date. This research focuses on the role of figurative language, specifically sarcasm, in regulating overt aggressive behaviour. Figurative language has an important role in modulating emotional intensity and communicating subtle emotional nuances whilst maintaining appropriate social boundaries (e.g. Dews & Winner, 1995). Sarcasm is a complex linguistic construct, heavily linked to social cognition, which is often used to communicate aggression in a socially acceptable manner. Difficulties comprehending sarcasm are common after TBI, as are difficulties with aggressive behaviour. AIM: This research aimed to investigate the processing of sarcasm in individuals with TBI in an attempt to understand whether possible deficits in linguistic performance may contribute to the aggressive behaviours typically exhibited by such patients. METHOD: A novel, auditory-visual, computer-based task was developed to test comprehension of short spoken comments in vignettes which were either sarcastic or literal, determined by prosodic cues and written context. Two questions followed each vignette; a factual question assessing understanding of the facts of the vignette, and an attitude question, assessing comprehension of the speaker’s true intentions. Seven non-aphasic patients who had experienced severe TBI were compared with seven matched control participants on their reaction times (RT) and accuracy on the experimental task. Data was analysed using repeated-measures ANOVA and ANCOVA. Clinical neurobehavioural data was also obtained in order to explore relationships with test performance. RESULTS: Overall, TBI participants performed slower than control participants; this difference was predicted by differences in overall cognitive ability (according to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment; MoCA; Nasreddine et al., 2005). When controlling for differences in cognitive ability, both TBI and control participants responded significantly slower to attitude questions in the sarcastic context than the literal. However, on factual questions, only control participants showed a similar benefit for the literal context, whereas patients’ responses did not differ for the two contexts. In addition, unlike patients, control participants were faster for questions presented second rather than first. Finally, patients made more errors on questions in the literal context than control participants, and their number of errors on literal attitude questions was significantly positively correlated with observed aggression scores, measured by the Overt Aggression Scale - Modified for Neurorehabilitation (Alderman, Knight & Morgan, 1997), and significantly negatively correlated with The Awareness of Social Inference Test (McDonald, Flanagan, Rollins & Kinch, 2003) Emotion Evaluation subtest. DISCUSSION: The present findings shed more light on the appreciation of sarcasm after TBI and the role that language has in modulating aggressive behaviour. The results do not support previous findings that TBI patients struggle comprehending sarcasm per se (e.g. Channon, Pellijeff & Rule, 2005). However, they do support the notion that people with TBI can experience difficulty with interpreting contextual and prosodic information and inferring others’ intentions (mentalising). Furthermore, the results suggest that difficulty mentalising may link with poor identification of emotions in others and may contribute to increased aggressive behaviour.

Figure 1
Image

References

Alderman, N. (2007). Prevalence, characteristics and causes of aggressive behaviour observed within a neurobehavioural rehabilitation service: Predictors and implications for management. Brain Injury, 21(9), 891-911.

Alderman, N., Knight, C., & Morgan, C. (1997). Use of a modified version of the Overt Aggression Scale in the measurement and assessment of aggressive behaviours following brain injury. Brain Injury, 11(7), 503-523.

Channon, S., Pellijeff, A., & Rule, A. (2005). Social cognition after head injury: Sarcasm and theory of mind. Brain and Language, 93, 123-134.

Dews, S., & Winner, E. (1995). Muting the meaning: A social function of irony. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10, 3-19.

McDonald, S., Flanagan, S., Rollins, J., & Kinch, J. (2003). TASIT: A new clinical tool for assessing social perception after traumatic brain injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 18(3), 219-238.

Nasreddine, Z. S., Phillips, N. A., Bédirian, V., Charbonneau, S., Whitehead, V., Collin, I., … Chertkow, H. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 695-699.

Keywords: Traumatic brain injury (TBI), Sarcasm, non-literal language, figurative language, social cognition, Aggression, aggressive behaviour

Conference: 54th Annual Academy of Aphasia Meeting, Llandudno, United Kingdom, 16 Oct - 18 Oct, 2016.

Presentation Type: Poster Sessions

Topic: Student Submissions

Citation: Allen JM and Klepousniotou E (2016). Figurative language and aggression after traumatic brain injury: Does sarcasm in spoken language have a role in modulating aggressive behaviour?. Front. Psychol. Conference Abstract: 54th Annual Academy of Aphasia Meeting. doi: 10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2016.68.00067

Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.

The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.

Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.

For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.

Received: 28 Apr 2016; Published Online: 15 Aug 2016.

* Correspondence: Miss. Joanne M Allen, University of Leeds, Clinical Psychology Training Programme, Leeds, LS2 9LJ, United Kingdom, ps11jma@leeds.ac.uk