scholarly journals Executive functions and language in children with different subtypes of specific language impairment

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 355-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Acosta Rodríguez ◽  
G.M. Ramírez Santana ◽  
S. Hernández Expósito
2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 307-327
Author(s):  
Izabela Kaczmarek ◽  
Sławomir Jabłoński ◽  
Paweł Kleka ◽  
Barbara Steinborn

Abstract Recently, extensive studies investigating executive functions in children with specific language impairment (SLI) have been performed. In the present study, we compared the level of executive functions (i.e., inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility) and literacy skills between 53 healthy children and 53 children with SLIs between the ages of 3 and 11 years. The groups were matched by age, gender and parental education level. Executive functions were assessed using the Children Card Sort, and the Literacy Assessment Battery was applied to measure literacy skills. The patients with SLI displayed a significantly lower level of cognitive flexibility than that of the healthy children. No significant differences were observed between the groups in inhibitory control and the majority of literacy skills. The results confirm the hypothesis that patients with SLI experience difficulties in cognitive flexibility.


1996 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 17-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Frome Loeb ◽  
Clifton Pye ◽  
Sean Redmond ◽  
Lori Zobel Richardson

The focus of assessment and intervention is often aimed at increasing the lexical skills of young children with language impairment. Frequently, the use of nouns is the center of the lexical assessment. As a result, the production of verbs is not fully evaluated or integrated into treatment in a way that accounts for their semantic and syntactic complexity. This paper presents a probe for eliciting verbs from children, describes its effectiveness, and discusses the utility of and problems associated with developing such a probe.


2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (10) ◽  
pp. 3790-3807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Ferman ◽  
Liat Kishon-Rabin ◽  
Hila Ganot-Budaga ◽  
Avi Karni

Purpose The purpose of this study was to delineate differences between children with specific language impairment (SLI), typical age–matched (TAM) children, and typical younger (TY) children in learning and mastering an undisclosed artificial morphological rule (AMR) through exposure and usage. Method Twenty-six participants (eight 10-year-old children with SLI, 8 TAM children, and ten 8-year-old TY children) were trained to master an AMR across multiple training sessions. The AMR required a phonological transformation of verbs depending on a semantic distinction: whether the preceding noun was animate or inanimate. All participants practiced the application of the AMR to repeated and new (generalization) items, via judgment and production tasks. Results The children with SLI derived significantly less benefit from practice than their peers in learning most aspects of the AMR, even exhibiting smaller gains compared to the TY group in some aspects. Children with SLI benefited less than TAM and even TY children from training to judge and produce repeated items of the AMR. Nevertheless, despite a significant disadvantage in baseline performance, the rate at which they mastered the task-specific phonological regularities was as robust as that of their peers. On the other hand, like 8-year-olds, only half of the SLI group succeeded in uncovering the nature of the AMR and, consequently, in generalizing it to new items. Conclusions Children with SLI were able to learn language aspects that rely on implicit, procedural learning, but experienced difficulties in learning aspects that relied on the explicit uncovering of the semantic principle of the AMR. The results suggest that some of the difficulties experienced by children with SLI when learning a complex language regularity cannot be accounted for by a broad, language-related, procedural memory disability. Rather, a deficit—perhaps a developmental delay in the ability to recruit and solve language problems and establish explicit knowledge regarding a language task—can better explain their difficulties in language learning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document