scholarly journals A Prosodically Controlled Word and Nonword Repetition Task for 2- to 4-Year-Olds

2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 223-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penny Roy ◽  
Shula Chiat

An association has been found between nonword repetition and language skills in school-age children with both typical and atypical language development (C. Dollaghan & T. F. Campbell, 1998; S. Ellis Weismer et al., 2000; S. E. Gathercole & A. D. Baddeley, 1990; J. W. Montgomery, 2002). This raises the possibility that younger children's repetition performance may be predictive of later language deficits. In order to investigate this possibility, it is important to establish that elicited repetition with very young children is both feasible and informative. To this end, a repetition task was designed and carried out with 66 children between 2 and 4 years of age. The task consisted of 18 words and 18 matched nonwords that were systematically manipulated for length and prosodic structure. In addition, an assessment of receptive vocabulary was administered. The repetition task elicited high levels of response. Total scores as well as word and nonword scores were sensitive to age. Lexical status and item length affected performance regardless of age: Words were repeated more accurately than nonwords, and 1-syllable items were repeated more accurately than 2-syllable items, which were in turn repeated more accurately than 3-syllable items. The effect of prosodic structure was also significant. Whole syllable errors were almost exclusive to unstressed syllables, with those preceding stress being most vulnerable. Performance on the repetition task was significantly correlated with performance on the receptive vocabulary test. This repetition task effectively elicited responses from most of the 2- to 4-year-old participants, tapped developmental change in their repetition skills, and revealed patterns in their performance; and thus it has the potential to identify deficits in very early repetition skills that may be indicative of wider language difficulties.

1998 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 1136-1146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Dollaghan ◽  
Thomas F. Campbell

A brief, processing-dependent, nonword repetition task, designed to minimize biases associated with traditional language tests, was investigated. In Study 1, no overlap in nonword repetition performance was found between a group of 20 school-age children enrolled in language intervention (LI) and a group of 20 age-matched peers developing language normally (LN). In Study 2, a comparison of likelihood ratios for the nonword repetition task and for a traditional language test revealed that nonword repetition distinguished between children independently identified as LI and LN with a high degree of accuracy, by contrast with the traditional language test. Nonword repetition may have considerable clinical utility as a screening measure for language impairment in children. Information on the likelihood ratios associated with all diagnostic tests of language is badly needed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 913-925 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susannah V. Levi ◽  
Richard G. Schwartz

Purpose In this study, the authors aimed to investigate how differences in language ability relate to differences in processing talker information in the native language and an unfamiliar language by comparing performance for different ages and for groups with impaired language. Method Three groups of native English listeners with typical language development (TLD; ages 7–9, ages 10–12, adults) and 2 groups with specific language impairment (SLI; ages 7–9, ages 10–12) participated in the study. Listeners heard pairs of words in both English and German (unfamiliar language) and were asked to determine whether the words were produced by the same or different talkers. Results In English, talker discrimination improved with age. In German, performance improved with age for the school-age children but was worse for adult listeners. No differences were found between TLD and SLI children. Conclusion These results show that as listeners' language skills develop, there is a trade-off between more general perceptual abilities useful for processing talker information in any language and those that are relevant to their everyday language experiences and, thus, tied to the phonology. The lack of differences between the children with and without language impairments suggests that general auditory processing may be intact in at least some children with SLI.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Verena E. Pritchard ◽  
Stephanie A. Malone ◽  
Kelly Burgoyne ◽  
Michelle Heron-Delaney ◽  
Dorothy V.M. Bishop ◽  
...  

Background: Weak or inconsistent hand preference has been postulated to be a risk factor for developmental language delay. Following on from our Registered Stage 1 report this study assessed the extent to which variations in language skills are associated with the strength of hand preference. Methods: Data are drawn from a large sample (N = 569) of 6- to 7-year-old children unselected for ability, assessed at two time points, 6 months apart. Hand preference was assessed using the Quantitative Hand Preference (QHP) task and five uni-manual motor tasks. Language skills (expressive and receptive vocabulary, receptive grammar, and morphological awareness) were assessed with standardized measures. Results: We found QHP scores did not distinguish children with weaker language skills from those with stronger language skills and the correlation between QHP scores and language ability was negligible in this study. Hand preference on the QHP task was significantly stronger among right-handed than left-handed children and left-handed children were typically inconsistent in the hand used across different tasks.  Conclusions: The findings presented here fail to provide any support for the theory that weak cerebral lateralisation (as assessed here by the QHP task) places children at risk of language difficulties. Stage 1 report: https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15077.1


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 1188-1198
Author(s):  
Sneha V. Bharadwaj ◽  
Whitney Barlow

Purpose This study examined reading outcomes and a comprehensive set of linguistic and cognitive factors considered to be associated with reading outcomes in children with hearing loss who use hearing aids or cochlear implants. Method Seventeen children with bilateral, prelingual hearing loss who use listening and spoken language and attended Grades 3–5 at a private oral school for the deaf participated in this study. Children were administered 13 subtests from norm-referenced tests pertaining to reading outcomes (reading comprehension and decoding), linguistic factors (vocabulary, background information, literal inferencing, nonliteral inferencing, and grammatical knowledge), and cognitive factors (verbal working memory, short-term memory, phonological short-term memory, and analytical reasoning). Results Performance of children with hearing loss was within normal ranges when compared to the normative means on all factors assessed except for nonword repetition. Furthermore, the performance of children with cochlear implants was comparable to that of the hearing aid users on all measures except for nonword repetition. Decoding was positively correlated with grammatical knowledge, analytical reasoning, and nonword repetition, whereas reading comprehension was positively correlated with grammatical knowledge, analytical reasoning, and inferencing. Conclusions Preliminary findings from this study suggest that elementary school–age children with hearing loss demonstrated positive outcomes with respect to reading outcomes and other factors assessed except for the nonword repetition task. Findings suggest that a nonword repetition task may be used to flag children with hearing loss who may experience difficulties with decoding. Given that grammatical knowledge and analytical reasoning showed moderate-to-moderately strong correlation with both reading outcome measures, it is recommended that multicomponent reading intervention programs for elementary school–age children with hearing loss incorporate explicit instruction in these domains.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document