Validity of the Sklar Aphasia Scale A German version of the Sklar Aphasia Scale (SAS) was administered to groups of fluent aphasics, nonfluent aphasics, and three control groups (brain-damaged patients without aphasia, schizophrenics, and normal subjects). The SAS discriminated fluent and nonfluent aphasics from schizophrenic, brain-damaged, and normal control subjects with a high level of confidence; ... Research Article
Research Article  |   March 01, 1977
Validity of the Sklar Aphasia Scale
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Rudolf Cohen
    Universität Konstanz, West Germany
  • Dorothea Engel
    Universität Konstanz, West Germany
  • Stephanie Kelter
    Universität Konstanz, West Germany
  • Gudula List
    Universität Konstanz, West Germany
  • Hans Strohner
    Universität Konstanz, West Germany
Article Information
Research Articles
Research Article   |   March 01, 1977
Validity of the Sklar Aphasia Scale
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, March 1977, Vol. 20, 146-154. doi:10.1044/jshr.2001.146
History: Received October 17, 1975 , Accepted September 9, 1976
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, March 1977, Vol. 20, 146-154. doi:10.1044/jshr.2001.146
History: Received October 17, 1975; Accepted September 9, 1976

A German version of the Sklar Aphasia Scale (SAS) was administered to groups of fluent aphasics, nonfluent aphasics, and three control groups (brain-damaged patients without aphasia, schizophrenics, and normal subjects). The SAS discriminated fluent and nonfluent aphasics from schizophrenic, brain-damaged, and normal control subjects with a high level of confidence; 91.8% of the aphasic and 81.5% of the brain-damaged patients without aphasia were correctly classified. However, the SAS did not discriminate between fluent and nonfluent aphasics. A factor analysis, which also included the subtests of the Token Test and eight other variables, showed the SAS and the Token Test to load mainly on the same general factor, which represents the severity of language disorders or the impairment of those left-hemisphere functions that might be basic to language. Subtests II and IV of the SAS also had loadings on a memory factor, but none of the subtests had variance on the third factor which represented the sensory-motor or fluency/nonfluency dimension.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access