The Effect of a Timed Correct Sound Production Task on Carryover

Abstract

This study investigated the effect, on conversational speech, of a training task that included correct sound production of words as a subject read a word list at increasing rates of speed. Five children participated in a 10-day program designed to automatize articulation of a target souncf. The /s/ was the target for three children and the /r/ for two. At each training session a subject was required to read a list of 60 words, 25 times. The child was rewarded each time he read the list within a prescribed time period while producing every target sound correctly. Probes of conversational speech were recorded each day in school, at home, and in a third setting at the conclusion of the program. Analyses of these tapes indicated that four of the five children showed varying degrees of carryover. Complete carryover, however, was not achieved. Subjects who made the greatest improvement tended to have the highest number of correct readings, as well as the most rapid readings of the word list. Recordings made in the home, school, and in a third environment reflected similar trends of carryover.

Triangulating speech sound generalization

“…For example, increasing the number of exemplars is one strategy that helps some children to generalize (Elbert, Powell, and Swartzlander, 1991). Other principles that have been shown to impact speech sound generalization include: making treatment more naturalistic (Camarata, 1993;Skelton, 2004;Tyler and Lewis, 2005), increasing automaticity (Bankson and Byrne, 1972), and increasing self-monitoring (Koegel, Koegel, and Costello Ingham, 1986;Shriberg and Kwiatkowski, 1990;Ertmer and Ertmer, 1998).…”

Application of the Challenge Point Framework During Treatment of Speech Sound Disorders

“…Phonological interventions are typically more effective with promoting performance generalization (e.g., Weiner, 1981) but are not always successful in this regard (e.g., Saben & Ingham, 1991) and require stimulability and good perceptual knowledge of the target phonemes for good results (Rvachew et al, 1999). Motor learning approaches recognize the importance of error during practice but also involve provision of enhanced supports after each incorrect production to facilitate high levels of success during intense practice sessions (Bankson & Byrne, 1972;Strand, 2020;Strand et al, 2006). These studies report mixed findings, with some participants having a good outcome and others failing to obtain maintenance and generalization of learning (for a review, see Bislick et al, 2012).…”

A comparison of two articulation carry-over techniques

“…The transfer of training in carry-over is achieved through a variety of means and devices less strictly defined than the acquisition stages. The terminal carry-over goal may involve automatization or habituation of the target sound, stimulus generalization to a variety of settings, the development of client responsibility, and intrinsic motivation (Chisum et al, 1969;Bankson and Byrne, 1972;Mowrer, 1977). Realization of these factors may facilitate phoneme carry-over.…”

“…Articulation is a learned set of motor events (Bankson and Byrne, 1972). Verbal communication necessitates a proficiency of articulation for adequate understanding between speaker and listener.…”