The word learning profile of adults with developmental language disorder

Abstract

Background and aims Previous investigations of word learning problems among people with developmental language disorder suggest that encoding, not retention, is the primary deficit. We aimed to replicate this finding; test the prediction that word form, not the linking of form to referent, is particularly problematic; and determine whether women with developmental language disorder are better word learners than men with developmental language disorder. Methods Twenty adults with developmental language disorder and 19 age-, sex-, and education-matched peers with typical language development attempted to learn 15 words by retrieval practice. Their retention was measured one day-, one week-, and one month after training. Results The participants with developmental language disorder required more exposures to the word-referent pairs than the participants with typical language development to reach mastery. While training to mastery, they made more errors in word form production, alone or in combination with errors in linking forms to the correct referents, but the number of no attempts and pure link errors did not differ by group. Women demonstrated stronger retention of the words than men at all intervals. The developmental language disorder and typical language development groups did not differ at the one-day- and one-month retention intervals but the developmental language disorder group was weaker at the one-week interval. Review via retrieval practice at the one-day and one-week interval enhanced retention at the one-month interval; the review at one week was more beneficial than the review at one day. Women benefitted more from the review opportunities than men but the developmental language disorder and typical language development groups did not differ. Conclusions Adults with developmental language disorder present with weaknesses in the encoding of new words but retention is a relative strength. Encoding word forms is especially challenging but encoding word-to-referent links is not. We interpret this profile, and the evidence of a female advantage, as consistent with the Procedural Circuit Deficit Hypothesis. Implications: When treating a client with developmental language disorder whose goal is to increase vocabulary knowledge, the interventionist should anticipate the need for multiple exposures to new words within activities that highlight the forms of the words and support their memory and production. Periodic review should serve to support long-term retention.

A multi-study examination of the role of repeated spaced retrieval in the word learning of children with developmental language disorder

“…Even if this were true, we have no indication from the data that any reduction in recall would be greater in the children with DLD. A recent study by McGregor et al [ 34 ] is informative in this regard. Those investigators studied adults with DLD and found retention at 1 month to be comparable to that of their typical language peers.…”

“…Thanks in part to the recent resurgence in retrievalbased research, several researchers have begun to explore the role that retrieval might play in the word learning of children and young adults with DLD [33][34][35]. The McGregor et al study [35] included comparisons between retrieval and no-retrieval learning conditions.…”

“…Words that included retrieval opportunities during the learning period had better recall 1 day later than words limited to study during the same period. In the more recent McGregor et al study [ 34 ], all words included retrieval trials. The words were presented until the young adults reached a predetermined level of accuracy.…”

How We Fail Children With Developmental Language Disorder

“…The estimated male-to-female prevalence ratio within the DLD population is 1.3:1 ( Tomblin et al, 1997 ), whereas the male-to-female receipt-of-services ratio is 1.71:1 in the United States ( Morgan et al, 2017 ) and 2.55:1 in the United Kingdom ( Lindsay & Strand, 2016 ). Girls and boys may present with different profiles of strengths and weaknesses in language itself ( McGregor et al, 2020 ) or differences in social behavior that serve to magnify (in the case of boys) or hide (in the case of girls) their language weaknesses ( Hart et al, 2004 ; Toseeb et al, 2017 ).…”

Failing to Identify Children With Language Disorder

“…The larger representation of boys could be fair because community samples do reveal a higher prevalence of DLD among boys than girls; however, the difference is small and not always significant (Norbury et al, 2016). • Girls and boys may present with different profiles of strengths and weaknesses in language itself (McGregor et al, 2020) or differences in social behavior that serve to magnify (in the case of boys) or hide (in the case of girls) their language weaknesses (Hart et al, 2004;Toseeb et al, 2017).…”