Language and Inhibition: Predictive Relationships in Children With Language Impairment Relative to Typically Developing Peers

Abstract

Background This study examined predictive relationships between two indices of language—receptive vocabulary and morphological comprehension—and inhibition in children with specific language impairment (SLI) and typically developing (TD) children. Methods Participants included 30 children with SLI and 41 TD age-matched peers (8–12 years). At two time points separated by 1 year, we assessed receptive vocabulary and morphological comprehension via standardized language measures and inhibition via a Flanker task. We used Bayesian model averaging and Bayesian regression analytical techniques. Results Findings indicated predictive relationships between language indices and inhibition reaction time (RT), but not between language indices and inhibition accuracy. For the SLI group, Year 1 inhibition RT predicted Year 2 morphological comprehension. For the TD group, Year 1 morphological comprehension predicted Year 2 inhibition RT. Conclusions This study provides preliminary evidence of a predictive relationship between language and inhibition, but this relationship differed between children with SLI and those with typical development. Findings suggest that inhibition RT played a larger predictive role in later morphological comprehension in children with SLI relative to the other relationships examined. Targeting inhibition skills as a part of language intervention may improve subsequent morphological comprehension. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12014823

Structural language impairment in Autism Spectrum Disorder versus Loss of Autism Diagnosis: Behavioral and neural characteristics

“…The posterior distribution, therefore, includes information from prior literature directly in the results. As is common under a Bayesian framework (e.g., Larson et al, 2020 ), we interpreted an effect to be important if zero was not contained within the 95% PPI and we used the term “important” to identify these effects. See Supplementary Materials 2 for all model convergence information which describes the model fit of the model predictions with the data.…”

Does Language Make a Difference? A Study of Language Dominance and Inhibitory Control

“…Previous studies in monolingual children have shown evidence of both unidirectional and bidirectional relations between language and executive function (including inhibitory control). While some authors suggest that executive function comes first and predicts language outcomes (e.g., Weiland et al, 2014 ; White et al, 2017 ; Ekerim and Selcuk, 2018 ; Larson et al, 2020 ) others suggest just the opposite, that language ability comes first and predicts inhibitory control (e.g., Fuhs and Day, 2011 ; Kuhn et al, 2016 ; Botting et al, 2017 ). Bidirectional relations have been also reported in previous studies in which language and executive function influence each other equally (e.g., Kaefer and Neuman, 2013 ; Bohlmann et al, 2015 ; Slot and von Suchodoletz, 2018 ).…”

Inhibition in preschool children at risk of developmental language disorder

“…The precise mechanisms behind its causation is unknown and recent research indicates both verbal and nonverbal skills are implicated (Conti-Ramsden et al, 2012). An increasing body of research suggests that the development of inhibition and language are interdependent (Kohnert, 2008; Spaulding, 2010) and compared to typically developing children, many children with DLD have difficulty with inhibition (Larson et al, 2020). Given the importance of the early identification of children with DLD, understanding the early development of inhibition in children at risk of DLD is needed.…”

“…Research has shown that a child who has problems with inhibition, is also likely to have problems with receptive and/or expressive language (Russell et al, 1999). Recently, Larson et al (2020) found predictive relationships between inhibition and aspects of language (morphology) and suggested that targeting inhibition skills in children with DLD is likely to improve morphological comprehension. However, these studies have not included bilingual children and there are few studies examining response inhibition in preschool children with DLD.…”

“…Given that response inhibition develops rapidly between the ages of two and four years (Dowsett and Livesey, 2000; Gerardi-Coulton, 2000; Reed et al, 1984) the nonverbal finding is surprising and Henry et al (2012) note the implications for diagnosis but also suggests that performance on the verbal task may reflect compensatory strategies employed by the age of eleven years. Research has shown that more complex interference inhibition (the ability to resist irrelevant/distractor information) develops slowly from the age of seven to twelve years (Esposito et al, 2013; Larson et al, 2020; Marton et al, 2014). There is also evidence that interference inhibition tasks have increased processing demands and the performance of seven to 12-year-old children with DLD on these tasks, is suggested to demonstrate inefficient inhibition or processing capacity limitations (Bjorklund and Harnishfeger, 1990; Spaulding, 2010).…”