Speech Development Across Subgroups of Autistic Children: A Longitudinal Study

Broome, Kate; McCabe, Patricia; Docking, Kimberley; Doble, Maree; Carrigg, Bronwyn

doi:10.1007/s10803-022-05561-8

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 62 publications

(111 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“… Hart & Curtin, 2023 ; Naigles et al, 2011 ; Sigman, 1998 ; Tager-Flusberg et al, 1990 ). These data are consistent with gradual, continual advances in development often characterized by different individual profiles ( Boucher, 2012 ; Broome et al, 2023 ) again, highlighting the heterogeneity that defines autism.…”

Section: A Critical Examination Of Natural Language Acquisition (Nla)supporting

confidence: 78%

Natural language acquisition and gestalt language processing: A critical analysis of their application to autism and speech language therapy

Hutchins,

Knox,

Fletcher

2024

Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aim Recently, there has been a lot of interest surrounding the term gestalt language processor (GLP) which is associated with Natural Language Acquisition (NLA): a protocol intended to support the language development of autistic people. In NLA, delayed echolalia is presumed raw source material that GLPs use to acquire language in a stage-like progression from delayed echolalia to spontaneous speech. The aim of this article is to evaluate NLA in light of relevant literatures to allow scrutiny of NLA claims. Main contributions First, we review the notion of gestalt language and situate it in the broader literature on language styles to update understanding of its significance. We then review the links from gestalt language processing to autism and identify definitional and conceptual problems and clarify the construct ‘episodic memory’. We discuss the ‘raw material view of delayed echolalia’ and identify theoretical and empirical shortcomings. Finally, we review Blanc’s language stages and their accompanying assessment and language support recommendations and challenge their validity. Conclusions & Implications The term ‘gestalt language processor’ is definitionally and conceptually troubled, the assertion that autistic people are GLPs is misleading and unhelpful, and evidence is lacking that GLP represents a legitimate clinical entity. The theoretical basis of NLA lacks empirical support. NLA stages are implausible and their accompanying assessment and support recommendations lack justification. We recommend the use of alternate, individualized, theoretically-sound, evidence-based, neurodiversity-affirming supports that are sensitive and responsive to the heterogeneity that defines autism.

show abstract

Section: A Critical Examination Of Natural Language Acquisition (Nla)supporting

confidence: 78%

Natural language acquisition and gestalt language processing: A critical analysis of their application to autism and speech language therapy

Hutchins,

Knox,

Fletcher

2024

Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… Note. Broome et al (2021, 2023) and Jokel et al (2021) included participants with a DSM-IV or DSM-5 diagnosis of ASD. Minshew et al (1995) included participants with a DSM-III-R/DSM-IV diagnosis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Studies assessing domains pertaining to structural language in autism vary in reporting practices and approaches to assessment: A systematic review

Girolamo,

Shen,

Monroe Gulick

et al. 2023

Autism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language in autism is heterogeneous, with a significant proportion of individuals having structural language difficulties and inclusion of language impairment as a specifier under Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) criteria for autism. This systematic review asked: What are the reporting patterns of variables pertaining to structural language in autism prior to and after publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.)? What norm-referenced assessments does research use to characterize the language abilities of autistic individuals with respect to language impairment? This preregistered review (PROSPERO: CRD42021260394) followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Searches took place in September 2022 and included Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, PsycINFO, PubMed, and the Directory of Open Access Journals. Search terms included three essential concepts: autism, language, and age. Two coders independently screened and evaluated articles. Searches yielded 57 qualifying studies, with mostly consistent reporting practices prior to and after the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Studies varied in how they defined language groups and in what norm-referenced measures they used. Interpreting research on structural language in autism requires attention to diagnostic and grouping criteria. Although inconsistency in reporting in original studies limited this review, better understanding the available information on structural language in autistic individuals aged 3–21 years may support identification of language needs. Lay abstract Under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.), language impairment can co-occur with autism. It is not yet clear how research defines, reports, and characterizes structural language abilities of autistic individuals eligible for school-based special education services (aged 3–21 years) in the United States. In the United States, students typically must be formally diagnosed to be eligible for services and supports. However, the quality of diagnosis is only as good as the research evidence on which diagnosis depends. To evaluate evidence quality, we examined how studies of school-aged autistic individuals report assessments of language ability. This systematic review included 57 studies using English language age-referenced assessments used to measure structural language. Findings showed many differences across studies in how language abilities were measured and reported. Also, none of the studies fully reported the variables relevant to characterizing language impairment. Outcomes were similar across versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Findings indicate that researchers and clinicians should pay attention to reporting diagnostic and grouping criteria. Carefully interpreting research evidence is critical for ensuring that diagnostic criteria and supports are representative of and accessible to autistic individuals and relevant parties.

show abstract

“…Researchers have previously identified an individual's phonetic inventory as an important predictor of vocal speech (Brady et al, 2021;Broome et al, 2022;Chenausky et al, 2018;Saul & Norbury, 2020;Smith et al, 2007;Thurm et al, 2007;Wetherby et al, 2007;Yoder et al, 2015). Although the VB-MAPP does not include a comprehensive phonemic inventory, the Vocal domain is designed to measure a participant's spontaneous vocal behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Echoics: Identifying the Predictive Indicators of Imitative Vocal Speech

Mason,

Bolds,

Gavagan

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Across the heterogeneous population of individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, a growing body of literature supports the use of echoic prompts toward conditioning other functional language skills. Identifying the prerequisite skills of an echoic repertoire may be beneficial for treatment planning and clinical decision making. Methods: A chart review was conducted for 118 patients with autism who received early intensive behavioral intervention to address the core deficits of their diagnosis. We examined the Level 1 scores on the Verbal Behavior Milestones Assessment and Placement Program (Sundberg, 2014) for all patients. Using their scores on the echoic skills subtest as a dependent variable, we ran a binomial logistic regression in which the remaining eight domains, along with age and sex, served as independent variables. Results: Our logistic regression model was statistically significant: X2(10) = 109.61, p < .001. The model explained 86.0% of the variance in echoic verbal behavior, and correctly classified 95.8% of cases. Patients who demonstrated a mand repertoire were greater than 3.5 times more likely to also exhibit an echoic repertoire. Additionally, vocal play and motor imitation were associated with an increased ability to echo. Conclusion: Using binomial logistic regression, we identified three predictors influencing the echoic verbal behavior for children with autism. Patients who demonstrated these three skills were statistically significantly more likely to echo the vocal verbal behavior of others. Additional research is now needed to confirm a functional relationship between each of these predictors and echoic behavior

show abstract

Speech Development Across Subgroups of Autistic Children: A Longitudinal Study

Cited by 9 publications

References 62 publications

Natural language acquisition and gestalt language processing: A critical analysis of their application to autism and speech language therapy

Natural language acquisition and gestalt language processing: A critical analysis of their application to autism and speech language therapy

Studies assessing domains pertaining to structural language in autism vary in reporting practices and approaches to assessment: A systematic review

Understanding Echoics: Identifying the Predictive Indicators of Imitative Vocal Speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About