2016
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1580742
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Your Laptop to the Rescue: Using the Child Language Data Exchange System Archive and CLAN Utilities to Improve Child Language Sample Analysis

Abstract: In this article, we review the advantages of language sample analysis (LSA) and explain how clinicians can make the process of LSA faster, easier, more accurate, and more insightful than LSA done "by hand" by using free, available software programs such as Computerized Language Analysis (CLAN). We demonstrate the utility of CLAN analysis in studying the expressive language of a very large cohort of 24-month-old toddlers tracked in a recent longitudinal study; toddlers in particular are the most likely group to… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…All production was videotaped in a sound proof room and subsequently transcribed orthographically as files in the Child Language ANalyses computer program (CLAN; MacWhinney, 2003). Each language sample and its corresponding digitized video were linked using the EUDICO Linguistic ANnotator (ELAN; Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, 2002).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All production was videotaped in a sound proof room and subsequently transcribed orthographically as files in the Child Language ANalyses computer program (CLAN; MacWhinney, 2003). Each language sample and its corresponding digitized video were linked using the EUDICO Linguistic ANnotator (ELAN; Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, 2002).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rather than coding morphemes by hand, users can run a command that makes CLAN identify the morphemes. Morpheme coding by CLAN is 94% accurate on average, and human coding of morphemes is unlikely to be 100% accurate (Bernstein Ratner & MacWhinney, 2016). Users do add codes to indicate intelligible segments, repetitions, and fillers (which are excluded from analyses) and abandoned utterances (which are included in analyses).…”
Section: Clanmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The transcriptions are formatted using the Codes for the Human Analysis of Transcripts (CHAT; MacWhinney, 2000) and linked to audio and video recordings through a computerized analytic program named Child Language Analyses (CLAN; MacWhinney, 2003). CLAN allows one to carry out a variety of linguistic analyses, such as frequency count, lexical diversity, mean length of utterance (MLU), as well as searches for user-specified combinations of words, character strings, or words in context, etc.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%