12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Spoken Word Learning in Children With Developmental Language Disorder or Dyslexia

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Word learning difficulties have been documented in multiple studies involving children with dyslexia and developmental language disorder (DLD; see also specific language impairment). However, no previous studies have directly contrasted word learning in these two frequently co-occurring disorders. We examined word learning in second-grade students with DLD-only and dyslexia-only as compared to each other, peers with both disorders (DLD + dyslexia), and peers with typical development. We hypothesized that children with dyslexia-only and DLD-only would show differences in word learning due to differences in their core language strengths and weaknesses.

          Method

          Children ( N = 244) were taught eight novel pseudowords paired with unfamiliar objects. The teaching script included multiple exposures to the phonological form, the pictured object, a verbal semantic description of the object, and spaced retrieval practice opportunities. Word learning was assessed immediately after instruction with tasks requiring recall or recognition of the phonological and semantic information.

          Results

          Children with dyslexia-only performed significantly better on existing vocabulary measures than their peers with DLD-only. On experimental word learning measures, children in the dyslexia-only and DLD + dyslexia groups showed significantly poorer performance than typically developing children on all word learning tasks. Children with DLD-only differed significantly from the TD group on a single word learning task assessing verbal semantic recall.

          Conclusions

          Overall, results indicated that children with dyslexia display broad word learning difficulties extending beyond the phonological domain; however, this contrasted with their relatively strong performance on measures of existing vocabulary knowledge. More research is needed to understand relations between word learning abilities and overall vocabulary knowledge and how to close vocabulary gaps for children with both disorders.

          Related collections

          Most cited references95

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation.

          The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2001, American Psychological Association, 2010) calls for the reporting of effect sizes and their confidence intervals. Estimates of effect size are useful for determining the practical or theoretical importance of an effect, the relative contributions of factors, and the power of an analysis. We surveyed articles published in 2009 and 2010 in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, noting the statistical analyses reported and the associated reporting of effect size estimates. Effect sizes were reported for fewer than half of the analyses; no article reported a confidence interval for an effect size. The most often reported analysis was analysis of variance, and almost half of these reports were not accompanied by effect sizes. Partial η2 was the most commonly reported effect size estimate for analysis of variance. For t tests, 2/3 of the articles did not report an associated effect size estimate; Cohen's d was the most often reported. We provide a straightforward guide to understanding, selecting, calculating, and interpreting effect sizes for many types of data and to methods for calculating effect size confidence intervals and power analysis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Phase 2 of CATALISE: a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: Terminology

            Background Lack of agreement about criteria and terminology for children's language problems affects access to services as well as hindering research and practice. We report the second phase of a study using an online Delphi method to address these issues. In the first phase, we focused on criteria for language disorder. Here we consider terminology. Methods The Delphi method is an iterative process in which an initial set of statements is rated by a panel of experts, who then have the opportunity to view anonymised ratings from other panel members. On this basis they can either revise their views or make a case for their position. The statements are then revised based on panel feedback, and again rated by and commented on by the panel. In this study, feedback from a second round was used to prepare a final set of statements in narrative form. The panel included 57 individuals representing a range of professions and nationalities. Results We achieved at least 78% agreement for 19 of 21 statements within two rounds of ratings. These were collapsed into 12 statements for the final consensus reported here. The term ‘Language Disorder’ is recommended to refer to a profile of difficulties that causes functional impairment in everyday life and is associated with poor prognosis. The term, ‘Developmental Language Disorder’ (DLD) was endorsed for use when the language disorder was not associated with a known biomedical aetiology. It was also agreed that (a) presence of risk factors (neurobiological or environmental) does not preclude a diagnosis of DLD, (b) DLD can co‐occur with other neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g. ADHD) and (c) DLD does not require a mismatch between verbal and nonverbal ability. Conclusions This Delphi exercise highlights reasons for disagreements about terminology for language disorders and proposes standard definitions and nomenclature.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A definition of dyslexia

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: SupervisionRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: Writing - original draftRole: Writing - review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Investigation
                Journal
                J Speech Lang Hear Res
                J Speech Lang Hear Res
                JSLHR
                Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research : JSLHR
                American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
                1092-4388
                1558-9102
                July 2021
                28 June 2021
                1 January 2022
                : 64
                : 7
                : 2734-2749
                Affiliations
                [a ]University of South Carolina, Columbia
                Author notes

                Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.

                Correspondence to Suzanne M. Adlof: sadlof@ 123456mailbox.sc.edu

                Editor-in-Chief: Stephen M. Camarata

                Editor: Susan Nittrouer

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0156-7231
                Article
                23814764000300140072
                10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00217
                8632516
                34185581
                ce7680a0-b430-4a99-9467-b86bb33d4aab
                Copyright © 2021 The Authors

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 30 April 2020
                : 25 October 2020
                : 14 March 2021
                Page count
                Pages: 16
                Funding
                This research was supported by grants from the National Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorders under Awards R03DC013399 and R01DC017156 (Principal Investigator: Adlof). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
                Categories
                research-article, Research Article
                Language
                Research Articles

                Comments

                Comment on this article