Different Origin of Auditory and Phonological Processing Problems in Children With Language Impairment

1999 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. V. M. Bishop ◽  
Sonia J. Bishop ◽  
Peter Bright ◽  
Cheryl James ◽  
Tom Delaney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Phonological Processing ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Shared Environment ◽  
Language Test ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Age Range

This study investigated the heritability of auditory processing impairment, as assessed by Tallal's Auditory Repetition Test (ART). The sample consisted of 37 same-sex twin pairs who had previously been selected because one or both twins met criteria for language impairment (LI) and 104 same-sex twin pairs in the same age range (7 to 13 years) from the general population. These samples yielded 55 children who met criteria for LI, who were compared with 76 children whose language was normal for their age (LN group). We replicated earlier work showing that group LI is impaired relative to group LN on ART. However, there was no evidence of a heritable influence on ART scores: Correlations between twins and their co-twins were reasonably high for both MZ and DZ twins, suggesting that performance is more influenced by shared environment than genetic factors. Analyses of extreme scores gave a similar picture of nonsignificant group heritability. In contrast, a test of phonological short-term memory, the Children's Nonword Repetition Test (CNRep), gave high estimates of group heritability. In general, CNRep was a better predictor of low language test scores than ART, but ART did make a significant independent contribution in accounting for variance in a test of grammatical understanding.

Phonological networks and new word learning

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 581-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabet Service
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Word Learning ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Perceptual Analysis ◽  
Motor Processes

The first report of a connection between vocabulary learning and phonological short-term memory was published in 1988 (Baddeley, Papagno, & Vallar, 1988). At that time, both Susan Gathercole and I were involved in longitudinal studies, investigating the relation between nonword repetition and language learning. We both found a connection. Now, almost 20 years later, in her Keynote Gathercole (2006) reviews a multitude of data bearing on the interpretation of this often replicated connection. Her main conclusions are three. First, both nonword repetition and word learning are constrained by the quality of temporary storage. She sees this storage as multiply determined, that is, affected by factors like perceptual analysis, phonological awareness (ability to identify and reflect on the speech sounds that make up words). Second, both nonword repetition and word learning are also affected by sensory, cognitive, and motor processes. Third, an impairment of phonological storage is typically associated with specific language impairment (SLI) but may not be a sole causal factor.

Commentary on Keynote

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 562-564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shelley Gray
Keyword(s):  
Word Learning ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Phonological Loop ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Test Cases ◽  
Phonological Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
The Relationship

Our understanding the relationship between verbal short-term memory as indexed by nonword repetition and word learning must now incorporate myriad factors that were not as apparent 17 years ago when Gathercole and Baddeley (1989) proposed that “the phonological memory skills tapped by nonword repetition play a causal role in vocabulary development” (p. 211). In particular, successful nonword repetition involves more than the phonological loop, word learning happens by degrees, and is influenced by many factors other than phonology, and children with specific language impairment (SLI), who have served as test cases by virtue of consistently demonstrating phonological memory deficits, often exhibit other deficits with the potential to negatively impact word learning. Gathercole (2006) still makes the case for temporary phonological storage playing an important role in word learning, but with several caveats. I would like to add two.

scholarly journals Beyond words: Phonological short-term memory and syntactic impairment in specific language impairment

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 545-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dorothy V. M. Bishop
Keyword(s):  
Word Learning ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Molecular Genetic ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Specific Language

The assessment of nonword repetition in children goes back at least to 1974, when the Goldman–Fristoe–Woodcock Auditory Skills Battery was published, including a subtest (Sound Mimicry) assessing nonword repetition (Goldman, Fristoe, & Woodcock, 1974). Nevertheless, it was not until 20 years later, when Gathercole and Baddeley (1990) reported a study of short-term memory in children with specific language impairment (SLI), that a theoretical framework was developed linking deficits in nonword repetition to impaired language acquisition. Gathercole's Keynote in this issue (2006) tells the story of how this initial study revealed a striking nonword repetition deficit in children with SLI, complementing work on typically developing children showing a major role of phonological short-term memory (STM) in word learning. As she points out, the story is a complex one: phonological STM is not the only skill tapped by the nonword repetition task, and children may do poorly for different reasons. Furthermore, relationships between nonword repetition and word learning may be reciprocal, with vocabulary level affecting children's ability to segment nonwords efficiently and retain them in memory. However, the original finding, that deficient nonword repetition is a strong correlate of SLI, has stood the test of time, to the extent that poor performance on this test has been used successfully as a marker of a heritable phenotype in molecular genetic studies of SLI (Newbury, Monaco, & Bishop, 2005).

Comparison of Auditory, Language, Memory, and Attention Abilities in Children With and Without Listening Difficulties

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 710-727
Author(s):  
Beula M. Magimairaj ◽  
Naveen K. Nagaraj ◽  
Alexander V. Sergeev ◽  
Natalie J. Benafield
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Significant Group ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Memory And Attention ◽  
Speed And Accuracy

Objectives School-age children with and without parent-reported listening difficulties (LiD) were compared on auditory processing, language, memory, and attention abilities. The objective was to extend what is known so far in the literature about children with LiD by using multiple measures and selective novel measures across the above areas. Design Twenty-six children who were reported by their parents as having LiD and 26 age-matched typically developing children completed clinical tests of auditory processing and multiple measures of language, attention, and memory. All children had normal-range pure-tone hearing thresholds bilaterally. Group differences were examined. Results In addition to significantly poorer speech-perception-in-noise scores, children with LiD had reduced speed and accuracy of word retrieval from long-term memory, poorer short-term memory, sentence recall, and inferencing ability. Statistically significant group differences were of moderate effect size; however, standard test scores of children with LiD were not clinically poor. No statistically significant group differences were observed in attention, working memory capacity, vocabulary, and nonverbal IQ. Conclusions Mild signal-to-noise ratio loss, as reflected by the group mean of children with LiD, supported the children's functional listening problems. In addition, children's relative weakness in select areas of language performance, short-term memory, and long-term memory lexical retrieval speed and accuracy added to previous research on evidence-based areas that need to be evaluated in children with LiD who almost always have heterogenous profiles. Importantly, the functional difficulties faced by children with LiD in relation to their test results indicated, to some extent, that commonly used assessments may not be adequately capturing the children's listening challenges. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12808607

scholarly journals CMIP and ATP2C2 Modulate Phonological Short-Term Memory in Language Impairment

2009 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 264-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dianne F. Newbury ◽  
Laura Winchester ◽  
Laura Addis ◽  
Silvia Paracchini ◽  
Lyn-Louise Buckingham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory

Nonword Repetition and Child Language Impairment

1998 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 1136-1146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Dollaghan ◽  
Thomas F. Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Language Intervention ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
Language Test ◽  
Likelihood Ratios ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
Traditional Language ◽  
High Degree ◽  
Repetition Task

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.

scholarly journals Performance in Nonword Repetition Tasks among Mandarin- English Bilingual Children in Malaysia

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chai Ping Woon ◽  
Ngee Thai Yap ◽  
Hui Woan Lim
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
Developmental Trend ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Development Delay ◽  
Qualitative Measure ◽  
Larger Sample ◽  
Better Than

The nonword repetition (NWR) task has been used to measure children’s expressive language skills, and it has been argued to have potential as an early language delay/ impairment detection tool as the NWR task can be conducted rather easily and quickly to obtain a quantitative as well as a qualitative measure of children’s attention to lexical and phonological information. This paper reports the performance of two NWR tasks among thirty bilingual Mandarin-English preschoolers between the age of four through six. The study indicated that performance in the NWR tasks showed a developmental trend with older children performing better than younger children. Word length also had a significant effect on performance, possibly an effect from better short-term memory capacity as the child grew older. The children also performed better in the Mandarin NWR task compared to the English NWR task. These findings suggest potential clinical applications for diagnosis of children with language impairment or at risk of language development delay. However, further studies should improve on the tasks to verify its efficacy and to obtain norms for performance with a larger sample of children at various age groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document