Private Speech of Learning Disabled and Normally Achieving Children in Classroom Academic and Laboratory Contexts

Abstract

Learning disabled (LD) children are often targets for cognitive-behavioral interventions designed to train them in effective use of a self-directed speech. The purpose of this study was to determine if, indeed, these children display immature private speech in the naturalistic classroom setting. Comparisons were made of the private speech, motor accompaniment to task, and attention of LD and normally achieving classmates during academic seatwork. Setting effects were examined by comparing classroom data with observations during academic seatwork and puzzle solving in the laboratory. Finally, a subgroup of LD children symptomatic of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was compared with pure LD and normally achieving controls to determine if the presumed immature private speech is a function of a learning disability or externalizing behavior problems. Results indicated that LD children used more task-relevant private speech than controls, an effect that was especially pronounced for the LD/ADHD subgroup. Use of private speech was setting- and task-specific. Implications for intervention and future research methodology are discussed.

The role of language in the development of emotion regulation.

“…Even after speech is fully internalized, an internal monologue can help a child deal with a difficult situation. Children with better verbal skills use more internalized than overt private speech (Berk & Landau, 1993;Berk & Spuhl, 1995) and progress more rapidly through the stages of self-speech (Berk & Garvin, 1984). Because children with more mature private speech are more socially and emotionally competent and have fewer externalizing behaviors (Berk & Landau, 1993;Bivens & Berk, 1990;Winsler et al, 2000;Winsler et al, 2003), spontaneous self-directed verbalizations likely contribute to emotion regulation.…”

“…Children with better verbal skills use more internalized than overt private speech (Berk & Landau, 1993;Berk & Spuhl, 1995) and progress more rapidly through the stages of self-speech (Berk & Garvin, 1984). Because children with more mature private speech are more socially and emotionally competent and have fewer externalizing behaviors (Berk & Landau, 1993;Bivens & Berk, 1990;Winsler et al, 2000;Winsler et al, 2003), spontaneous self-directed verbalizations likely contribute to emotion regulation. Private speech in emotionally challenging circumstances may interrupt or slow emotional responses and facilitate the inhibition or delay of actions that are readied as part of emotional responses (Tomasello, Kruger, & Ratner, 1993).…”

A Vygotskian critique of self-instructional training

“…seatwork, descriptions of own activity are In their seminal study of private speech, more frequent among ADHD than normal Kohlberg et al warned readers about con-boys (Berk & Potts, 1991) and among LD fusion and lack of coding reliability be-children with attention-deficit symptomtween these two types of utterances. They atology than among pure LD and normally stated, "The E(experimenter)'s tendency in achieving controls (Berk & Landau, 1993). on-the-spot coding was to judge as 'self-Another possible sign of private speech guidance'many statements judged by a sec-immaturity among impulsive and ADHD ond judge as 'describing own activity'" children is that they display fewer whispers (Kohlberg et al, 1968, p. 727).…”

Insight into the Role of Interaction in Language Acquisition: Vygotsky’s Interactionist Theory of Language

“…In contrast to Fernyhough and Fradley (2005), Berk and Landau (1993) have found the evidence of the use of private speech by children with learning disabilities during puzzle solving and academic seatwork in a laboratory setting. Through the comparison of 112 normally achieving children and children with learning disabilities from grades 3-6, the researchers have obtained proof that the latter group of children uses more task-relevant and setting-specific speech than the former group.…”

“…In more precise terms, the child brought up in the family with a high socio-economic status more readily develops and internalises private speech than the child living in poverty because of a more linguistically and cognitively stimulating environment. According to Berk and Landau (1993), two crucial conclusions may be deduced from Vygotsky's (1987a) analysis of private speech: 1) the child starts extensively using it during demanding and complex tasks; 2) the reliance on private speech ensures task success and development of self-control.…”