Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T21:12:26.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of input manipulations on the word learning abilities of children with and without specific language impairment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2004

JANICE E. HOROHOV  and
JANNA B. OETTING
JANICE E. HOROHOV
Affiliation:
Louisiana State University
JANNA B. OETTING
Affiliation:
Louisiana State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three input variables were manipulated during a story-viewing task to examine the word learning abilities of children with and without specific language impairment (SLI). The variables were presentation rate, sentence complexity, and word type. Fifty-four children participated: 18 were identified as SLI and 36 served as normally developing age-matched or language-matched controls. The stimuli involved a videotaped reading of two stories that had novel words embedded in the narrative, and word learning was measured by examining the children's ability to infer the meanings of the novel words from the story viewing context. A picture pointing task and a real word synonym task served as comprehension probes. A nonword repetition task and a battery of language tests were also administered. Two of the three input manipulations affected the children's scores. Across both probes, word type resulted in a main effect, with children from all three groups earning higher scores for verbs than nouns. On the picture pointing probe, presentation rate interacted with group. The interaction reflected lower scores in the fast rate than the slow rate for the children with SLI but not for the controls. Children's nonword repetition scores and standardized tests of vocabulary and syntax were moderately correlated with each other, and together these variables accounted for significant variation in the children's story viewing scores even after age, IQ, and articulation ability were controlled. The vocabulary and syntax tests contributed unique variance whereas nonword repetition contributed shared variance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , March 2004 , pp. 43 - 65
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baddeley, A., & Wilson, B. A. 1993. A developmental deficient in short-term phonological memory: Implications for language and reading. Memory, 1, 65 78.Google Scholar
Bishop, D. 1989. Test of Reception of Grammar. Manchester, UK: University of Manchester.
Bishop, D., North, R., & Donlan, C. 1996. Nonword repetition as a behavioural marker for inherited language impairment: Evidence from a twin study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 37, 391 403.Google Scholar
Bowey, J. 2001. Nonword repetition and young children's receptive vocabulary: A longitudinal study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 441 470.Google Scholar
Burgemeister, B., Blum, H., & Lorge, L. 1972. Columbia Mental Maturity Scale. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Campbell, T., Dollaghan, C., Needleman, H., & Janosky, J. 1997. Reducing bias in language assessment: Processing-dependent measures. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 433 444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conti–Ramsden, G. 2004. Processing and linguistic markers in young children with specific language impairment (SLI). Manuscript submitted for publication.
Conti–Ramsden, G., Botting, N., & Faragher, B. 2001. Psycholinguistic markers for specific language impairment (SLI). Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 741 748.Google Scholar
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. 1980. Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 561 584.Google Scholar
Dollaghan, C. 1987. Fast mapping in normal and language impaired children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 52, 218 222.Google Scholar
Dollaghan, C., Biber, M., & Campbell, T. 1993. Constituent syllable effects in a nonsense-word repetition task. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1051 1054.Google Scholar
Dollaghan, C., & Campbell, T. F. 1998. Nonword repetition and child language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 41, 1136 1146.Google Scholar
Dubowski, C., & Dubowski, M. 1995. Snug bug. New York: Grosset & Dunlap.
Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. 1981. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test—Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
Edwards, J., & Lahey, M. 1998. Nonword repetitions of children with specific language impairment: Exploration of some explanations for their inaccuracies. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 279 309.Google Scholar
Eller, R. G., Pappas, C., & Brown, E. 1988. The lexical development of kindergarteners: Learning from written context. Journal of Reading Behavior, 20, 5 24.Google Scholar
Elley, W. 1989. Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 174 187.Google Scholar
Ellis Weismer, S., & Hesketh, L. 1993. The influence of prosodic and gestural cues on novel word acquisition by children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1013 1025.Google Scholar
Ellis Weismer, S., & Hesketh, L. 1996. Lexical learning by children with specific language impairment: Effects of linguistic input presented at varying speaking rates. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 177 190.Google Scholar
Ellis Weismer, S., & Hesketh, L. 1998. The impact of emphatic stress on novel word learning by children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 41, 1441 1450.Google Scholar
Ellis Weismer, S., Tomblin, B., Zhang, X., Buckwalter, P., Chynoweth, J., & Jones, M. 2000. Nonword repetition performance in school-age children with and without language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, Hearing Research, 43, 865 878.Google Scholar
Fagundes, D., Haynes, W., Haak, N., & Moran, M. 1998. Task variability effects on the language test performance of Southern lower socioeconomic class African American and Caucasian five-year-olds. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 29, 148 157.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. E., & Baddeley, A. D. 1989. The role of phonological memory in normal and disordered language development. In C. von Euler, L. Lundber, & G. Lemerstrand (Eds.), Brain and reading (pp. 245 255). New York: MacMillan.
Gathercole, S. E., & Baddeley, A. D. 1990a. Phonological memory deficits in language disordered children. Is there a causal connection? Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 336 360.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. E., & Baddeley, A. D. 1990b. The role of phonological memory in vocabulary acquisition: A study of young children learning new words. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 439 454.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. B., & Baddeley, A. D. 1993. Working memory and language. Hove, UK: Erlbaum.
Gathercole, S. B., & Baddeley, A. D. 1995. Short-term memory may yet be deficient in children with language impairments: A comment on van der Lely & Howard (1983). Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 463 472.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. B., Hitch, G., Service, E., & Martin, A. 1997. Phonological short-term memory and new word learning in children. Developmental Psychology, 33, 966 979.Google Scholar
Goldman, R., & Fristoe, M. 1986. Goldman–Fristoe Test of Articulation. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
Hall, W., Nagey, W., & Linn, R. 1984. Spoken words: Effects of situation and social group on oral word usage and frequency. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Harrison, D. 1986. Wake up sun! New York: Random House.
Howard, D., & van der Lely, H. 1995. Specific language impairment is not due to a short-term memory deficit: Response to Gathercole and Baddeley. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 466 472.Google Scholar
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. 1992. A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122 149.Google Scholar
Kiernan, B., & Gray, S. 1998. Word learning in a supported-learning context by preschool children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, Hearing Research, 41, 161 171.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B. 1998. Children with specific language impairment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
MacDonald, M., Just, M., & Carpenter, P. 1992. Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 56 98.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J. 1995a. Examination of phonological working memory in specifically language impaired children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 16, 355 378.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J. 1995b. Sentence comprehension in children with specific language impairment: The role of phonological working memory. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 187 199.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J. 2002. Understanding the language difficulties of children with specific language impairments: Does verbal working memory matter? American Journal of Speech–Language Pathology, 11, 77 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newcomer, P., & Hammill, D. 1988. Test of Language Development—Primary. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Oetting, J. 2004. Children with SLI make use of prepositions to learn verbs. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Oetting, J. 1999. Children with SLI make use of argument structure cues to learn verbs. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 1261 1274.Google Scholar
Oetting, J., & McDonald, J. 2001. Nonmainstream dialect and specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 207 223.Google Scholar
Oetting, J., Rice, M., & Swank, L. 1995. Quick incidental learning (QUIL) of words by school-aged children with and without SLI. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 434 445.Google Scholar
Pena, E. D., & Quinn, R. 1997. Task familiarity: Effects on the test performance of Puerto Rican and African–American children. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in School, 28, 323 332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, M. 1990. Preschooler's QUIL: Quick incidental learning of words. In G. Cont–Ramsden & C. Snow (Eds.), Children's language (Vol. 7, pp 171 196). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rice, M., Buhr, J., & Nemeth, M. 1990. Fast mapping word-learning abilities of language-delayed preschoolers. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 33 42.Google Scholar
Rice, M., Buhr, J., & Oetting, J. 1992. Specific-language-impaired children's quick incidental learning (QUIL) of words: The effect of a pause. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 1040 1048.Google Scholar
Rice, M., Cleave, P., & Oetting, J. 2000. Use of syntactic cues in lexical acquisition by children with SLI. Journal of Speech Language Hearing Research, 43, 582 595.Google Scholar
Rice, M., Oetting, J., Marquis, J., Bode, J. & Pae, S. 1994. Frequency of input effects on SLI children's word comprehension. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 106 122.Google Scholar
Robbins, C., & Ehri, L. 1994. Reading storybook to kindergartners helps them learn new vocabulary words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 54 64.Google Scholar
Sahlen, B., Wagner, C., Nettelbadt, U., Radeborg, K. 1999. Language comprehension and non-word repetition in children with language impairment. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 13, 369 380.Google Scholar
Senechal, M., & Cornell, E. H. 1993. Vocabulary acquisition through shared reading experiences. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 361 374.Google Scholar
van der Lely, H. K., & Howard, D. 1994. Children with specific language impairment: Linguistic impairment or short term memory deficit? Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1193 1207.Google Scholar
Windsor, J., Milbrath, R., Carney, E., & Rakowski, S. 2001. General slowing hypothesis in language impairment: Methodological considerations in testing the hypothesis. Journal of Speech, Language, Hearing Research, 44, 446 461.Google Scholar