Type of publicationArticle ( AbstractBackground: It is well documented that children with specific language impairment (SLI)

A B S T R A C TAlthough sentence repetition is considered a reliable measure of children's grammatical knowledge, few studies have directly compared children's sentence repetition performance with their understanding of grammatical structures. The current study aimed to compare children's performance on these two assessment measures, using a multiple-choice picture-matching sentence comprehension task and a sentence repetition task. Thirty-three typically developing children completed both assessments, which included relative clauses representing a range of syntactic roles. Results revealed a similar order of difficulty of constructions on both measures but little agreement between them when evaluating individual differences. Interestingly, repetition was the easier of the two measures, with children showing the ability to repeat sentences

Purpose This study investigated the relationship between 2 components of memory—phonological short-term memory (pSTM) and working memory (WM)—and the control of relative clause constructions in children with specific language impairment (SLI). Method Children with SLI and 2 control groups—an age-matched and a younger group of children with typical development—repeated sentences, including relative clauses, representing 5 syntactic roles and 2 levels of matrix clause complexity. The Working Memory Test Battery for Children was administered. Results All 3 groups showed significant associations between pSTM and both types of matrix clause construction. For children with SLI, significant associations emerged between (a) WM and more complex matrix clause constructions, (b) WM and relative clauses including a range of syntactic roles, and (c) pSTM and the least difficult syntactic role. In contrast, the age-matched control group could repeat almost all syntactic roles without invoking the use of either memory component. Conclusions The role of pSTM and WM in the production of relative clauses by children with SLI is influenced by the degree of difficulty of the structure to be recalled. In therapy, the effect of WM limitations can be minimized by approaching each structure within the context of a simple matrix clause.

Studies examining productive syntax have used varying elicitation methods and have tended to focus on either young children or adolescents/adults, so we lack an account of syntactic development throughout middle childhood. We describe here the results of an analysis of clause complexity in narratives produced by 354 speakers aged from four years to adulthood using the Expressive, Receptive, and Recall of Narrative Instrument (ERRNI). We show that the number of clauses per utterance increased steadily through this age range. However, the distribution of clause types depended on which of two stories was narrated, even though both stories were designed to have a similar story structure. In addition, clausal complexity was remarkably similar regardless of whether the speaker described a narrative from pictures, or whether the same narrative was recalled from memory. Finally, our findings with the youngest children showed that the task of generating a narrative from pictures may underestimate syntactic competence in those aged below five years.

Purpose The aim of this study was to examine the degree to which quantitative aspects of dosage (dose, dose frequency, and total intervention duration) have been examined in intervention studies for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). Additionally, to establish the optimal quantitative dosage characteristics for phonology, vocabulary, and morphosyntax outcomes. Method This registered review (PROSPERO ID CRD42017076663) adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Search terms were included in seven electronic databases. We included peer-reviewed quasi-experimental, randomized controlled trial or cohort analytical studies, published in any language between January 2006 and May 2020. Included articles reported on participants with DLD ( M = 3–18 years); oral language interventions with phonology, vocabulary, or morphosyntax outcomes; and experimental manipulation or statistical analysis of any quantitative aspect of dosage. Studies were appraised using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Results Two hundred forty-four articles reported on oral language interventions with children with DLD in the domains of interest; 13 focused on experimentally/statistically manipulating quantitative aspects of dosage. No article reported phonological outcomes, three reported vocabulary, and eight reported morphosyntax. Dose frequency was the most common characteristic manipulated. Conclusions Research is in its infancy, and significant further research is required to inform speech-language pathologists in practice. Dosage characteristics are rarely adequately controlled for their individual effects to be identified. Findings to date suggest that there is a point in vocabulary and morphosyntax interventions after which there are diminishing returns from additional dosage. If dose is high (number of learning opportunities within a session), then the literature suggests that session frequency can be reduced. Frequent, short sessions (2/3 × per week, approximately 2 min) and less frequent, long sessions (1 × per week, approximately 20 min) have yielded the best outcomes when composite language measures have been used; however, replication and further research are required before clinicians can confidently integrate these findings into clinical practice. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13570934

We examined the effect of two methods of assessment—multiple‐choice sentence–picture matching and an animated sentence‐verification task—on typically developing children's understanding of relative clauses. A sample of children between the ages of 3 years 6 months and 4 years 11 months took part in the study (N = 103). Results indicated that (a) participants performed better on the sentence‐verification than on the multiple‐choice task independently of age, (b) each testing method revealed a different hierarchy of constructions, and (c) the impact of testing method on participants’ performance was greater for some constructions than others. Our results suggest that young children can understand complex sentences when they are presented in a manner that better reflects how people process language in natural discourse. These results have implications for the study of language comprehension in suggesting that results from multiple‐choice tasks may not generalize to other methods. Open Practices This article has been awarded an Open Data badge. All data are publicly accessible via the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/27gwb. Learn more about the Open Practices badges from the Center for Open Science: https://osf.io/tvyxz/wiki.

Background: Down syndrome (DS) is associated with poor language skills that seem disproportionate to general nonverbal ability, but the nature and causes of this deficit are unclear. We assessed how individuals with DS understand complex linguistic constructions, and considered how cognitive ability, memory and hearing level impact the ability of those with DS to process these sentence types. Methods: There were three groups participating in the study: children with DS (n = 33) and two control groups composed of children with cognitive impairment of unknown aetiology (CI) (n = 32) and children with typical development (n = 33). Both groups were matched to those with DS on cognitive ability. Using a newly devised animation task, we examined how well individuals with DS (n = 33) could understand relative clauses, complement clauses and adverbial clauses compared to children with CI and typically developing controls. Participants also completed the Test for the Reception of Grammar-2, three measures of memory (forward and backward digit recall, visuo-spatial memory) and a hearing screen. Results: Results indicated that (1) with the exception of intransitive subject relative clauses, children with DS performed at floor on all other complex sentences, (2) they performed at a significantly lower level than both control groups, and (3) DS status accounted for a significant proportion of the variance over and above memory skills. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that children with DS have a disproportionate difficulty understanding complex sentences compared to two control groups matched on mental age. Furthermore, their understanding of syntax is not completely explained by poor cognitive or memory skills, rather it appears to be a specific deficit that may distinguish children with DS from other neurodevelopmental disorders.

Purpose The aim of this study was to extract key learning from intervention studies in which qualitative aspects of dosage, dose form , have been examined for children with developmental language disorder (DLD)—in vocabulary, morphosyntax, and phonology domains. This research paper emerged from a pair of systematic reviews, aiming to synthesize available evidence regarding qualitative and quantitative aspects of dosage. While quantitative aspects had been experimentally manipulated, the available evidence for dose form (tasks or activities within which teaching episodes are delivered) was less definitive. Despite this, the review uncovered insights of value to DLD research. Method A preregistered systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42017076663) adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was completed. Included papers were quasi-experimental, randomized controlled trial, or cohort analytic studies, published in any language between January 2006 and May 2019; oral language interventions with vocabulary, morphosyntax, or phonology outcomes; and participants with DLD ( M = 3–18 years). The intention was to include papers in which dose form was experimentally manipulated or statistically analyzed, while quantitative dosage aspects were controlled, such that definitive conclusions about optimal dose form could be drawn and gaps in the evidence identified. Results Two hundred and twenty-four papers met the above inclusion criteria; 27 focused on dose form . No study controlled for all quantitative aspects of dosage such that we could effectively address our original research questions. Despite this, key points of learning emerged with implications for future research. Conclusions There is tentative evidence of advantages for explicit over implicit instruction and of the benefits of variability in input, elicited production, and gestural and other visual supports. With careful design of dose form, there is potential to design more efficient interventions. Speech-language pathology research would benefit from an agreed taxonomy of dose form components and standardized reporting of intervention studies, to enable cross-study comparisons and a systematic accrual of knowledge to identify optimal dose form for clinical application.