Concrete and relational vocabulary: Comparison between Williams and Smith–Magenis syndromes

Heinze, Elena Garayzábal; Osório, Ana Alexandra Caldas; Lens, María; Sampaio, Adriana

doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.055

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This contrast demonstrates that despite a relative strength in verbal ability in WS, this does not encompass spatial language ability. This is consistent with previous assessments of spatial language in WS (Phillips et al, 2004; Landau and Hoffman, 2005; Laing and Jarrold, 2007; Heinze et al, 2014). This impairment demonstrates a cross-domain interaction; spatial language ability, although part of the verbal domain, is more in line with spatial cognition than verbal cognition in WS.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Phillips et al (2004) found that individuals with WS struggled to understand these spatial terms, relative to TD controls and individuals with moderate learning difficulties of the same verbal MA. Relatedly, Heinze et al (2014) demonstrated that spatial relational vocabulary was marginally weaker than concrete vocabulary in WS. These findings were further supported by Laing and Jarrold (2007) who demonstrated that individuals with WS find it difficult to create a mental model of spatial language terms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impaired Spatial Category Representations in Williams Syndrome; an Investigation of the Mechanistic Contributions of Non-verbal Cognition and Spatial Language Performance

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were to: provide a precise characterisation of spatial category representations in Williams syndrome (WS); to determine the nature of the mechanistic contributions from spatial language performance and non-verbal cognition to spatial category representations in WS; and to explore the stability of spatial category representations in WS using error analysis. Spatial category representation was assessed across nine spatial categories (In, On, Under, In Front, Behind, Above, Below, Left, and Right) using an odd-one-out task. The performance of individuals with WS (N = 24; 12;00 years;months to 30;07 years;months) was compared to data from typically developing children aged four to 7 years (N = 75), published in Farran and Atkinson (2016). The WS group performed at the level of typical 4- and 5-year-olds. Despite this low level of ability, they demonstrated typical variation in their representation of easier to harder spatial categories, in line with the spatial category representation model (Farran and Atkinson, 2016). Error analysis of broad category understanding (i.e., category understanding which includes non-prototypical category members), however, showed that errors reflected fewer guess responses than expected by chance in the WS group only, which could suggest strategic responding in this group. Developmental trajectory analyses demonstrated a significant contributing influence of both non-verbal mental age and spatial language ability in the TD group. For the WS group, non-verbal mental age significantly contributed to spatial category representations, whilst the contributing influence of spatial language ability was marginally significant. With reference to level of ability, spatial category representations in the WS group were consistently lower than would be expected for non-verbal mental age, but on a par with their (low) spatial language mental age. Spatial category representations in WS are discussed with reference to their contribution to the hallmark deficit in spatial construction and drawing abilities in WS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Impaired Spatial Category Representations in Williams Syndrome; an Investigation of the Mechanistic Contributions of Non-verbal Cognition and Spatial Language Performance

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Morphosyntactic abilities had been considered selectively spared ( Clahsen et al, 2004 ), although this assumption was challenged in several studies indicating some degree of atypical morphological processing ( Thomas et al, 2001 ; Boloh and Ibernon, 2010 ; Benítez-Burraco et al, 2017 ; Diez-Itza et al, 2017 ). Receptive vocabulary is also an area of relative strength in people with Down syndrome, but only for concrete vocabulary ( Mervis and John, 2008 ; Garayzábal et al, 2014 ; Moraleda and López, 2020 ). Regarding lexical production, a tendency to use rare words and an atypical pattern of semantic categorization has been reported ( Bellugi et al, 1994 ; Purser et al, 2010 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Late phonological development in Williams syndrome

Pérez

Martínez²,

Diez-Itza³

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Williams syndrome is a neurodevelopmental genetic disorder characterized by a unique phenotype, including mild to moderate intellectual disability and an uneven neuropsychological profile of relative strengths and weaknesses. Language structure components (i.e., phonology, morphosyntax, and vocabulary) have been considered an area of specific ability compared to pragmatic language use. However, research on phonological development in Williams syndrome is very scarce, and it suggests atypical patterns. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to explore the profiles of late phonological development in Spanish-speaking children, adolescents, and adults with Williams syndrome, based on the analysis of five classes of processes (Syllable Structure, Substitution, Omission, Assimilation, and Addition) in spontaneous speech. The phonological profiles of seven children (aged 3–8 years), and seven adolescents and young adults (aged 14–25 years) with Williams syndrome were compared with two normative groups of typically developing (TD) children at different stages of late phonological development (aged 3 and 5 years). The frequency of phonological processes in the group of children with Williams syndrome was similar to that of 3-year-old TD children, which suggests that they would be in the first stage of late phonological development (expansion stage). The group of older individuals with Williams syndrome showed a much lower frequency of processes, similar to that of 5-year-old TD children in the last stage of phonological development (resolution stage). However, their phonological processes appeared to be persistent and independent of chronological age. Furthermore, asynchronies in quantitative and qualitative profiles (relative frequency) indicated atypical and complex trajectories in late phonological development, which cannot be described as simply delayed or protracted. Remarkable individual differences were observed, especially in the group of adolescents and adults with Williams syndrome, although the majority of cases conformed to the modal profiles of their groups. A major tendency for Omission, including final consonant deletion, may be considered atypical and specific to Williams syndrome at all ages. The results of the present study raise the need for continued and appropriate phonological assessment and treatment for people with Williams syndrome across the lifespan.

show abstract

“…Neurodevelopmental disorders are related to a specific cognitive profile, which is characterized by moderate intellectual disability , poor working memory, and attention deficit and hyperactivity. Language is delayed and speech disorders continue into adulthood (Udwin et al 2001;Solomon et al 2002;Gropman et al 2006;Garayzábal Heinze et al 2011;Osório et al 2012;Heinze and Lens 2013;Garayzábal et al 2014;Hidalgo and Garayzábal 2019). Concerning the behavioral phenotype, individuals with SMS tend to easily show states of anxiety and nervousness, especially in new situations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice Characteristics in Smith–Magenis Syndrome: An Acoustic Study of Laryngeal Biomechanics

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Smith–Magenis syndrome (SMS) is a rare genetic disease characterized by intellectual disability, serious behavior disorders, neurodevelopment delay, and speech and language disorders. An acoustic and biomechanical analysis of the voice of SMS young adults was carried out due to (a) the close relationship between the laryngeal biomechanics and the clinical and emotional state of a person; (b) the fact that no research on the voice in this syndrome has been conducted previously. The vocal timbre of most people diagnosed with SMS does not seem to be according to the complexion of diagnosed individuals, nor to their gender and age, so it could be interesting to attend the analysis of phonation of people with a rare genetic syndrome such as SMS. We used BioMetPhon, a specific piece of software to analyze the glottal source and biomechanics of vocals folds. Nineteen features related to dysphonia, physiology, and biomechanics of the vocal folds were considered. The adult phonation of 9 individuals with SMS was analyzed and compared to 100 normative male and female adult voices. Results showed that the phonation of the SMS group significantly deviates from the adult normophonic profile in more than one of the 19 features examined, such as stiffness of the thyroarytenoid muscle and dynamic mass of the vocal fold cover, among others.

show abstract

Concrete and relational vocabulary: Comparison between Williams and Smith–Magenis syndromes

Cited by 7 publications

References 42 publications

Impaired Spatial Category Representations in Williams Syndrome; an Investigation of the Mechanistic Contributions of Non-verbal Cognition and Spatial Language Performance

Impaired Spatial Category Representations in Williams Syndrome; an Investigation of the Mechanistic Contributions of Non-verbal Cognition and Spatial Language Performance

Late phonological development in Williams syndrome

Voice Characteristics in Smith–Magenis Syndrome: An Acoustic Study of Laryngeal Biomechanics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About