Investigating the interchangeability and diagnostic utility of the PPVT-III and PPVT-IV for children with and without SLI

Spaulding, Tammie J.; Hosmer, Sabrina; Schechtman, Calli J.

doi:10.3109/17549507.2012.762042

Cited by 25 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The standardized tests of vocabulary that are prominent in the field have not demonstrated adequate diagnostic accuracy (Gray, Plante, Vance, & Henrichsen, 1999;Spaulding, Hosmer, & Schechtman, 2013). For this reason, we did not employ them as part of our selection criteria.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adjective Learning in Young Typically Developing Children and Children With Developmental Language Disorder: A Retrieval-Based Approach

Leonard

Deevy

Karpicke

et al. 2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose There are strong retention benefits when learners frequently test themselves during the learning period. This practice of repeated retrieval has recently been applied successfully to children's word learning. In this study, we apply a repeated retrieval procedure to the learning of novel adjectives by preschool-age children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and their typically developing (TD) peers. We ask whether the benefits of retrieval extend to children's ability to apply the novel adjectives to newly introduced objects sharing the same characteristics as the objects used during the learning period. Method Fourteen children with DLD ( M age = 62.64 months) and 13 TD children ( M = 62.54 months) learned novel adjectives in 2 sessions. For each child, half of the adjectives were learned in a repeated spaced retrieval condition, and half were learned in a repeated study–only condition. Recall was assessed immediately after the second learning session and 1 week later. A recognition test was also administered at the 1-week mark. Results On the recall tests, for both groups of children, recall was better for adjectives learned in the repeated spaced retrieval condition. Adjectives learned by the 2nd day were retained 1 week later. Every adjective correctly applied to an object used during the learning period was also extended accurately to new objects with the same characteristics. On these recall tests, the children with DLD did not differ from the TD group in the number of items recalled, though their phonetic accuracy was lower. On the recognition test, the DLD group showed greater accuracy for adjectives that had been learned in the repeated spaced retrieval condition than for those learned in the repeated study condition, whereas the TD group performed at high levels in both conditions. Conclusion Repeated spaced retrieval appears to provide an effective boost to word learning. Because its benefits are seen even when a word must be extended to new objects, the application of this procedure seems well suited for learning new language material rather than being limited to item-specific memorization.

show abstract

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adjective Learning in Young Typically Developing Children and Children With Developmental Language Disorder: A Retrieval-Based Approach

Leonard

Deevy

Karpicke

et al. 2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies show that bilingual children score below monolingual age appropriate norms when vocabulary size is assessed in only one of their languages ( Bialystok et al, 2010 ; Hoff et al, 2012 ; Spaulding et al, 2013 ). For example, Spanish-English bilingual students lag behind monolingual age matched peers in oral language abilities in SL English and in the heritage language (HL) Spanish ( Tabors et al, 2003 ; Páez et al, 2007 ; Uccelli and Páez, 2007 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is the aim of this paper to assess bilingual dominance and metalinguistic awareness as possible factors that may explain the contradictory results in the literature. The difference between bilinguals and monolinguals in vocabulary size and the gap between expressive and receptive vocabulary further highlight the importance of testing different dominance groups in order to understand the contribution of the relative proficiency in each language in each modality, expressive or receptive ( Spaulding et al, 2013 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vocabulary, Metalinguistic Awareness and Language Dominance Among Bilingual Preschool Children

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Awareness of language structure has been studied in bilinguals, but there is limited research on how language dominance is related to metalinguistic awareness, and whether metalinguistic awareness predicts vocabulary size. The present study aims to explore the role of language dominance in the relation between vocabulary size in both languages of bilingual children and metalinguistic awareness in the societal language. It evaluates the impact of two metalinguistic awareness abilities, morphological and lexical awareness, on receptive and expressive vocabulary size. This is of special interest since most studies focus on the impact of exposure on vocabulary size but very few explore the impact of the interaction between metalinguistic awareness and dominance. 5–6-year-old preschool children with typical language development participated in the study: 15 Russian-Hebrew bilingual children dominant in the societal language (SL) Hebrew, 21 Russian-Hebrew bilingual children dominant in the Heritage language (HL) Russian and 32 monolingual children. Dominance was determined by relative proficiency, based on standardized tests in the two languages. Tasks of morphological and lexical awareness were administered in SL-Hebrew, along with measures of receptive and expressive vocabulary size in both languages. Vocabulary size in SL-Hebrew was significantly higher for SL-dominant bilinguals (who performed like monolinguals) than for HL-dominant bilinguals, while HL-Russian vocabulary size was higher for HL-dominant bilinguals than for SL-dominant bilinguals. A hierarchical regression analyzing the relationship between vocabulary size and metalinguistic awareness showed that dominance, lexical metalinguistic awareness and the interaction between the two were predictors of both receptive and expressive vocabulary size. Morphological metalinguistic awareness was not a predictor of vocabulary size. The relationship between lexical awareness and SL-vocabulary size was limited to the HL-dominant group. HL-dominant bilinguals relied on lexical metalinguistic awareness, measured by fast mapping abilities, that is, the abilities to acquire new words, in expanding their vocabulary size, whereas SL-dominant bilinguals and monolinguals did not. This difference reflects the milestones of lexical acquisition the different groups have reached. These findings show that metalinguistic awareness should also be taken into consideration when evaluating the variables that influence vocabulary size among bilinguals though different ways in different dominance groups.

show abstract

“…Over time, these difficulties diminish (Spaulding et al, 2013). Bedore and Peña (2008) explain: 'By early school age children with LI (language impairment) … typically perform within the normal range of development on standardized vocabulary measures'.…”

Section: Composite Scoresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying language difference versus disorder in bilingual children

Hemsley

Holm

Dodd

2014

Speech, Language and Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Speech-language pathologists are frequently required to assess culturally and linguistically diverse children. Achieving culturally sensitive, valid, and clinically feasible assessment of children in this population can be challenging. Several assessment options are available; however, the literature lacks discussion around clinical reasoning and differential diagnosis using a combination of these options. This paper examines the use of a number of assessment techniques in combination for differentiating language difference from language disorder in early sequential bilingual children. In two cases, valid differential diagnosis is achieved by obtaining comprehensive information on each child's language learning context, then applying a range of culturally sensitive assessment techniques: peer-child comparison, composite scoring, and dynamic assessment. Two essential standards for evaluating bilingual language development are presented. First, formal tests used in isolation are insufficient for diagnosing specific language impairment in bilingual children: the use of alternative techniques is crucial. Second, diagnosis requires the implementation of a range of alternative assessment techniques. No single methodology provides a definitive conclusion of difference versus disorder. A range of assessments considered together, however, provide a strong body of evidence outlining a child's language abilities in their unique cultural context.

show abstract

Investigating the interchangeability and diagnostic utility of the PPVT-III and PPVT-IV for children with and without SLI

Cited by 25 publications

References 42 publications

Adjective Learning in Young Typically Developing Children and Children With Developmental Language Disorder: A Retrieval-Based Approach

Adjective Learning in Young Typically Developing Children and Children With Developmental Language Disorder: A Retrieval-Based Approach

Vocabulary, Metalinguistic Awareness and Language Dominance Among Bilingual Preschool Children

Identifying language difference versus disorder in bilingual children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About