An alternating treatment comparison of minimal and maximal opposition sound selection in Turkish phonological disorders

Abstract

A single-subject alternating treatment design in combination with a staggered multiple baseline model across subjects was implemented with two 6:0 year-old girls, monozygotic twins, who were referred to a university clinic for evaluation and treatment. The treatment programme was structured according to variants of minimal pair contrast treatment in which the target sounds and their oppositions were selected according to either minimal or maximal opposition (including major-class differences) contrast treatments to evaluate which of the sound selection strategy would result in better learning. Independent variables were the minimal and maximal opposition conditions; dependent variables were the target phonemes treated. Consistent with the literature, maximal opposition treatment resulted in significantly greater changes in the sound systems of the twins than minimal opposition treatment.

Involvement of parents in intervention for childhood speech sound disorders: a review of the evidence

“…), goal selection (in three studies; e.g., McKean et al . ), and other tasks such as selecting intervention activities or attending a parent support group (in three studies; e.g., Topbaş and Ünal ). One study which reported parent involvement did not describe the aspects of intervention in which parents were involved (Glogowska et al .…”

“…Rvachew et al Shriberg and Kwiatkowski (1987) Generic phonological approach Within-subjects design n = 73 (2;9-9;6) Parents completed home tasks Parent-delivered production practice commencing at word level 3/14 6/11 Topbaş andÜnal (2010) Complexity approach (maximal oppositions) compared with minimal pairs ATD with staggered MBD across subjects n = 2 (twins, 6;0) Parents selected reinforcements (e.g., games) to be used in SLT-delivered intervention -7/11 9/11 Tyler et al (1987) Minimal pairs compared with modified cycles AB design n = 4 (3;1-5;1)…”

Progresso terapêutico de sujeitos submetidos a terapia fonológica pelo modelo de oposições múltiplas: comparação do progresso terapêutico

“…A study 23 refers to the occurrence of greater generalization (another position of the word) in subjects with more restricted phonological inventories (less phonemes present), and the same can be observed in this study comparing the two children. Other studies [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] also reported the generalization occurrence after phonological therapy.…”

“…The traditional approach makes the therapy longer, since all the sounds need to be taught separately in all positions in the syllable and the word. The phonological approaches are faster because they use one or few target sounds induces to the acquisition of many other sounds substitution in the child system which were not directly treated [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] . Sometimes the progress in the acquisition of a segment results in the regression of others, until the acquisition process is stabilized with the acquisition of this sounds 20 .…”

“…This treatment uses multiple sounds simultaneously considering the ability of children to generalize. The generalization refers to children ability to apply phonological knowledge on non-treated targets in therapy 11,14,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] . The first evaluation is used both to therapeutic planning and evolution monitoring.…”