Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-78dcdb465f-vzs5b Total loading time: 3.578 Render date: 2021-04-18T06:52:44.218Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

The validity of a parent report instrument of child language at twenty months*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Philip S. Dale
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Elizabeth Bates
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego
J. Steven Reznick
Affiliation:
Yale University
Colleen Morisset
Affiliation:
University of Washington

Abstract

When carefully assessed and analysed, parent report can provide a valuable overall evaluation of children's language at 20 months. Norming information and validity coefficients are presented here for a vocabulary checklist assessment included in the Early Language Inventory. Normative data are provided for fullterm, preterm, and precocious samples, including selected vocabulatory subsets that are indicative of early language learning style. The vocabulary checklist has substantial validity as indexed by correlations with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development and particularly with a language subscale derived from that test.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

*

The data forming the basis of the analyses of this paper were collected in projects supported by grants from the New England and Seattle Nodes of the John B. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Network on the Transition from Infancy to Childhood, and from the National Institute of Mental Health. We are grateful to Kathryn Barnard, Principal Investigator of NIMH grant MH 36894, ‘Clinical Nursing Model for Infants and Their Families’, for making the Early Language Inventory data for the Seattle Preterm, Fullterm, and Social Risk samples available for this project; and to Donna Thal for her helpful comments on the paper.

References

Bar-Aden, A. & Leopold, W. F. (1971). Child language: a book of readings. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bates, E., Bretherton, I. & Snyder, L. (1988). From first words to grammar: individual differences and dissociable mechanisms. New York: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Bayley, N. (1969). Bayley scales of infant development. New York: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1985). Beyond communicative adequacy: from piecemeal knowledge to an integrated system in the child's acquisition of language. In Nelson, K. (ed.), Children's language. Vol. 5. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bretherton, I., McNew, S., Snyder, L. & Bates, E. (1983). Individual differences at twenty months: analytic and holistic strategies in language acquisition. Journal of Child Language 10. 293320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gopnik, A. & Meltzoff, A. N. (1986). Relations between semantic and cognitive development in the one-word stage: the specificity hypothesis. Child Development 57. 1040–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollingshead, A. B. (1975). Four factor index of social status. Unpublished manuscript. Yale University: Department of Sociology.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 38. No. 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reznick, J. S. & Goldsmith, L. (1989). A multiple form word production checklist to assess early language. Journal of Child Language 15. 91100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, L., Bates, E. & Bretherton, I. (1981). Content and context in early lexical development. Journal of Child Language 8. 565–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 200 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 18th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The validity of a parent report instrument of child language at twenty months*
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

The validity of a parent report instrument of child language at twenty months*
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

The validity of a parent report instrument of child language at twenty months*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *