Analogous and Distinctive Patterns of Prelinguistic Communication in Toddlers With and Without Hearing Loss

Zaidman‐Zait, Anat; Dromi, Esther

doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/081)

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent research utilizing both parental report and videotaped analyses during parent–child interactions provides us with some limited applications in terms of JBR and young children with HL (Cruz, Quittner, Marker, & DesJardin, 2013; DesJardin & Eisenberg, 2007; Fung, Chow, & McBride-Chang, 2005; Zaidman-Zait & Dromi, 2007). Most of the cited research has been conducted on preschool to early childhood populations of children who have severe to profound HL, and two investigations included children who utilize cochlear implants.…”

Section: Children With Hlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Utilizing a parental observation questionnaire, which measured the frequency of parent–child storybook reading and child linguistic production, toddlers with HL demonstrated lower spontaneous use of words and reduced involvement in JBR with their parents compared to toddlers with NH. Reduction in hearing may impede the coordination between adult, child, and object in toddlers with HL due to a need to alternate gaze between parent and book to receive the linguistic information from the parent (Zaidman-Zait & Dromi, 2007). …”

Section: Children With Hlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Much less is known about families and their very young children with hearing loss (HL). From limited research in the field, parents of young children with HL may be challenged while reading storybooks with their children due to the auditory and language delays of their children (Swanwick & Watson, 2007; Zaidman-Zait & Dromi, 2007). Thus, global programs and instructional procedures that highlight JBR for children with NH may not fully and appropriately support families and their very young children with HL who participate in early intervention programs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Parental Support for Language Development During Joint Book Reading for Young Children With Hearing Loss

DesJardin

Doll

Stika

et al. 2014

Communication Disorders Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parent and child joint book reading (JBR) characteristics and parent facilitative language techniques (FLTs) were investigated in two groups of parents and their young children; children with normal hearing (NH; n = 60) and children with hearing loss (HL; n = 45). Parent–child dyads were videotaped during JBR interactions, and parent and child behaviors were coded for specific JBR behaviors using a scale developed for this study. Children’s oral language skills were assessed using the Preschool Language Scale–4 (PLS-4). Parents of children with HL scored higher on two of the four subscales of JBR: Literacy Strategies and Teacher Techniques. Parents of children with NH utilized higher level FLTs with their children who had higher language skills. Higher level FLTs were positively related to children’s oral language abilities. Implications are discussed for professionals who work with families of very young children with HL.

show abstract

Section: Children With Hlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Children With Hlmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parental Support for Language Development During Joint Book Reading for Young Children With Hearing Loss

DesJardin

Doll

Stika

et al. 2014

Communication Disorders Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Development of presymbolic communication has been described for individuals with different types of disabilities and disorders including hearing impairment (Zaidman-Zait & Dromi, 2007), brain lesions (Bates, Vicari, & Trauner, 1999), autism (Luyster, Qiu, Lopez, & Lord, 2007; Chian, Soong, Lin, & Rogers, 2008; Wetherby, et al, 2004), Down syndrome (Abbeduto, Warren, & Conners, 2007; Fidler, Philofsky, Hepburn, & Rogers, 2005), Williams syndrome (Singer-Harris, Bellugi, Bates, Jones, & Riossen, 1997), Angelman syndrome (Didden et al, 2009) and fragile X syndrome (Flenthrope & Brady, 2010). For example, children with Down syndrome typically have a profile of relative strength in gesture use across communicative functions (Abbeduto et al, 2007; Brady et al, 2008) whereas children with autism frequently have an uneven profile characterized by infrequent commenting gestures (Anderson et al, 2007; Kasari, Freeman, & Paparella, 2006)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of the Communication Complexity Scale

Brady

Fleming

Thiemann-Bourque

et al. 2012

Am J Speech Lang Pathol

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate description of an individual's communication status is critical in both research and practice. Describing the communication status of individuals with severe intellectual and developmental disabilities is difficult because these individuals often communicate with presymbolic means that may not be readily recognized. Our goal was to design a communication scale and summary score for interpretation that could be applied across populations of children and adults with limited (often presymbolic) communication forms. Methods The Communication Complexity Scale (CCS) was developed by a team of researchers and tested with 178 participants with varying levels of presymbolic and early symbolic communication skills. Correlations between standardized and informant measures were completed, and expert opinions were obtained regarding the CCS. Results CCS scores were within expected ranges for the populations studied and inter-rater reliability was high. Comparison across other measures indicated significant correlations with standardized tests of language. Scores on informant report measures tended to place children at higher levels of communication. Expert opinions generally favored the development of the CCS. Clinical implications The scale appears to be useful for describing a given individual's level of presymbolic or early symbolic communication. Further research is needed to determine if it is sensitive to developmental growth in communication.

show abstract

“…Research on SBR is sparse for infants and toddlers with HL who are fitted with hearing aids (DesJardin et al, 2014; Zaidman-Zait & Dromi, 2007). In terms of frequency of book reading, in a recent cross-sectional study, DesJardin and her colleagues (2014) found no significant group differences for parental perceptions of frequency of reading at home (i.e., number of minutes per day) between parents of young children with HL (mean age = 25.8 months) and parents of a NH control group (mean age = 18.6 months), even after controlling for children's age.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Longitudinal Investigation of the Home Literacy Environment and Shared Book Reading in Young Children With Hearing Loss

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The principle goal of this longitudinal study was to examine parent perceptions of home literacy environment (e.g., frequency of book reading, ease of book reading with child) and observed behaviors during shared book reading (SBR) interactions between parents and their children with hearing loss (HL) as compared to parents and their children with normal hearing (NH) across three time points (12-, 24-, and 36-months old). Relationships were also explored among home literacy environment factors and SBR behaviors and later language outcomes, across all three time points for parents of children with and without HL. Design Participants were a group of parents and their children with HL (N = 17) and typically developing children with NH (N = 34). Parent perceptions about the home literacy environment were captured through a questionnaire. Observed parent behaviors and their use of facilitative language techniques (FLTs) were coded during videotaped SBR interactions. Children's oral language skills were assessed using a standardized language measure at each time point. Results No significant differences emerged between groups of parents (HL and NH) in terms of perceived home literacy environment at 12 and 36 months. However, significant group differences were evident for parent perceived ease of reading to their child at 24 months. Group differences also emerged for parental SBR behaviors for literacy strategies and interactive reading at 12 months and for engagement and interactive reading at 36 months, with parents of children with HL scoring lower in all factors. No significant relationships emerged between early home literacy factors and SBR behaviors at 12 months and oral language skills at 36 months for parents of children with NH. However, significant positive relationships were evident between early home literacy environment factors at 12 months and oral language skills at 36 months for parents and their children with HL. Conclusions Although both groups of parents increased their frequency of SBR behaviors over time, parents of children with HL may need additional support to optimize SBR experiences to better guide their toddlers and preschoolers’ language skills. Early intervention efforts that focus on SBR interactions that are mutually enjoyed and incorporate specific ways to encourage parent-child conversations will be essential as children with HL acquire language.

show abstract

Analogous and Distinctive Patterns of Prelinguistic Communication in Toddlers With and Without Hearing Loss

Cited by 15 publications

References 36 publications

Parental Support for Language Development During Joint Book Reading for Young Children With Hearing Loss

Parental Support for Language Development During Joint Book Reading for Young Children With Hearing Loss

Development of the Communication Complexity Scale

A Longitudinal Investigation of the Home Literacy Environment and Shared Book Reading in Young Children With Hearing Loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About