Purpose We investigated perception and production of lexical stress and processing of affective prosody in adolescents with high functioning autism (HFA). We hypothesized preserved processing of lexical and affective prosody, but atypical lexical prosody production. Method 16 children with HFA and 15 typically developing (TD) peers participated in three experiments: 1. Perception of affective prosody, 2. Lexical stress perception, 3. Lexical stress production. In Experiment 1, participants labeled sad, happy, and neutral spoken sentences that were low-pass filtered, to eliminate verbal content. In Experiment 2 participants disambiguated word meanings based on lexical stress (HOTdog, vs. hotDOG). In Experiment 3 participants produced these words in a sentence completion task. Productions were analyzed using acoustic measures. Results Accuracy levels showed no group differences. Participants with HFA could determine affect from filtered sentences and disambiguate words based on lexical stress. They produced appropriately differentiated lexical stress patterns but demonstrated atypically long productions indicating reduced ability in natural prosody production. Conclusions Children with HFA were as capable as their TD peers in receptive tasks of lexical stress and affective prosody. Prosody productions were atypically long, despite accurate differentiation of lexical stress patterns. Future research should use larger samples and spontaneous vs. elicited productions.

This study examined whether preschool children are able to identify the source of new knowledge that they acquired in a stimulating, interactive learning context. Sixty 4-to 5-year-old children participated in two staged learning events. Several days later, children were asked questions that assessed their knowledge of factual information presented during the events. Children indicated whether they knew the answer to each question and whether they remembered the moment they learned it (i.e. had an episodic memory of the learning event), and then recalled event details. A majority of preschoolers were able to accurately identify how they had learned at least some factual information, but this ability was not consistent across children and test items. Recall of event-specific details was positively correlated with correct answers to factual questions. The results indicate that when preschool children are asked to reflect on past learning experiences that occurred in complex and realistic contexts, their source monitoring abilities are evident but not yet fully developed.

Eighty 4-to 9-year-old children answered factual knowledge questions in math, science and social studies during one-on-one interviews. Children indicated whether they had known or guessed each answer, and whether they (a) remembered the moment they learned the answer (episodic response) or (b) did not remember. For episodic responses, children provided memory narratives of learning episodes. One third of children's responses identified a learning episode. There was a developmental trend in which older children were more episodic than younger children, and when children knew and provided correct answers, there was a gender difference in which females were more episodic than males. Developmental and gender differences in the characteristics of memory narratives were also apparent.

Accurately remembering how and when one's own learning occurs is an important metacognitive skill that matures during the early school years. In two studies, the impact of a delay on this ability was examined. In Study 1, 30 children in two age groups (4‐year‐olds and 5‐year‐olds) participated in two‐staged learning events and were interviewed immediately after each event about the facts they had learned in the events and about how they had acquired them. Children in both age groups learned the facts, but had significant difficulty reporting on their own learning. In Study 2, 79 children in the same age range participated in one staged learning event and were given similar interviews as in Study 1, either immediately after the event or after a 2‐ to 3‐day delay. Five‐year‐olds were more accurate in their memories of learning in the delay condition than in the immediate condition, but 4‐year‐olds showed no performance differences as a function of delay. Findings are interpreted in light of developmental literature on episodic memory, source monitoring, and memory binding. Highlights How does a delay interval between impact children's ability to accurately recall episodic memories of their own learning? Children completed staged learning events. Four‐ and five‐year‐olds struggled to recall instances of learning immediately, but five‐year‐olds improved after a delay. Five‐year‐olds, but not four‐year‐olds, appear to benefit from a moderate delay when recalling learning episodes. This could be due to developments in other metacognitive skills.

No abstract