ArticleCoDAS2026
Impact of ageing on discourse types: a comparative study.
Article in CoDAS, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAgeing is associated with a decline in physical, physiological, and cognitive-linguistic abilities, impacting language and social participation. Discourse, a critical aspect of language, involves the integration of phonology, lexicon, syntax, cohesion, and coherence. Examining variations in discourse types is essential for understanding age-related changes and improving language assessment and treatment strategies. Therefore, the present study investigated the effect of ageing on discourse production across different discourse types.
methodsThis study recruited 120 neurotypical, Konkani-Kannada bilingual participants. Participants were divided into three age groups: young adults (18-35 years), middle-aged adults (35.1-55 years), and older adults (55.1-70 years). Discourse tasks included picture description, narration, and conversation, conducted in Konkani, their native language. Responses were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the Discourse Analysis Scale. Discourse Quotient was calculated for each task through qualitative analysis.
resultsSignificant differences in discourse performance were observed across all three types among the three groups. Additionally, significant differences were noted across discourse types within young, middle, and older adults. However, older adults exhibited a different pattern of performance, performing poorer on picture description compared to the other two types and their counterpart groups.
conclusionThe study highlights the influence of ageing and task type on discourse production, with older adults facing greater challenges in narrative tasks. These findings emphasize the need for speech-language pathologists to consider the linguistic and cognitive demands of older adults in clinical interventions, enabling the development of more effective language assessment and therapy programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.