Mapping the Early Language Environment Using All-Day Recordings and Automated Analysis

Gilkerson, Jill; Richards, Jeffrey A.; Warren, Steven F.; Montgomery, Judith K.; Greenwood, Charles R.; Oller, D. Kimbrough; Hansen, John H. L.; Paul, Terrance D.

doi:10.1044/2016_ajslp-15-0169

Cited by 351 publications

(351 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

323

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, standard deviations were not reported in SSM, so the actual effect size differences between groups cannot be calculated. However, using data from Gilkerson et al (, table 5) a large effect size difference ( d = 0.84) between low‐ and high‐SES groups can be estimated, yet neither SSM nor HR were powered to detect an effect size of that magnitude. Thus, even though the potential effect sizes for differences between groups are likely to be large, prior work may not have been powered to detect such effects.…”

Section: What Is Needed To Measure the Word Gap?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To close a 30‐million‐word gap just through encouraging parents to read more with their children would require approximately 96 books per day. However, if we utilize the 4‐million‐word gap that can be estimated from Gilkerson et al (), each additional book per day reduces the gap by nearly 8%—a much more feasible task. Given that 15%–40% of parents, depending on demographic group, report not reading to their child at all (Bradley, Corwyn, McAdoo, & Garcia Coll, ; Khan, Purtell, Logan, Ansari, & Justice, ), identifying these families and the barriers associated with parents reading to their children may provide an avenue for reducing the word gap, particularly as families are more involved in their children’s learning now than in previous decades (Bassok & Latham, ).…”

Section: Why Is a More Precise Estimate Of The Word Gap (Or Lack Thermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As raised by SSM and Golinkoff et al (), the quality and quantity of language and the different types of language heard should be accounted for. This could be conducted by taking advantage of new technology (Gilkerson et al, ) that allows for capturing various aspects of language interactions (including the “conversational‐duet” noted by Golinkoff et al, ). However, it may also be beneficial to measure nonverbal communication such as gestures as this has been found to be an important component of early language development (Iverson & Goldin‐Meadow, ).…”

Section: What Is Needed To Measure the Word Gap?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over the last two decades a significant body of work has developed out of the seminal findings of Hart and Risley (, ; hereafter referred to as HR) who found that children from families with low socioeconomic statuses (SES) heard 30 million fewer words during the first 4 years of life than children from families with high SES (known as the “30 million word gap”). More recent studies measuring children’s language environments have aspired to shed greater light on the SES‐based differences that children experience during these formative years (Gilkerson et al, ; Rowe, ; Sperry, Sperry, & Miller, ). One study estimated a much smaller, but still substantial, gap of around 4 million words (Gilkerson et al, ) and another challenged the existence of the gap at all (Sperry et al, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More recent studies measuring children’s language environments have aspired to shed greater light on the SES‐based differences that children experience during these formative years (Gilkerson et al, ; Rowe, ; Sperry, Sperry, & Miller, ). One study estimated a much smaller, but still substantial, gap of around 4 million words (Gilkerson et al, ) and another challenged the existence of the gap at all (Sperry et al, ). Despite the wide variation in the estimation of the gap, the “30‐million” number is assumed to have “proved its mettle” and is used as the justification for a wide range of research and community efforts supporting children’s language environments.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Language Clearly Matters; Methods Matter Too

Purpura

2019

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over two decades ago, the “30‐million‐word” gap rose to prominence after work by Hart & Risley (1995) suggested that children from families with low socioeconomic status (SES) heard fewer words than their peers from families with higher SES during their first 4 years of life. Recent research challenges the magnitude and even existence of this gap. However, due to methodological limitations, we know very little about the presence, magnitude, and settings in which there may be a word gap. Moreover, causal evidence is also limited. I highlight why it is critical for the field to have a more precise understanding of the nature of the word gap (or lack thereof) and potential avenues for better evaluating this phenomenon.

show abstract

Section: What Is Needed To Measure the Word Gap?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Why Is a More Precise Estimate Of The Word Gap (Or Lack Thermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Is Needed To Measure the Word Gap?mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Language Clearly Matters; Methods Matter Too

Purpura

2019

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Assessment of a Parent-Child Interaction Intervention for Language Development in Children

Christakis

Lowry²,

Goldberg³

et al. 2019

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key Points Question Was a clinic-based multimodel intervention, including a smartphone app and coaching, associated with improved language environment for children 2 to 12 months of age? Findings A pre-post study was conducted for 61 families with children aged 2 to 12 months. The intervention was associated with significant improvements in the Developmental Snapshot score and mean z scores for adult word count and parent-child conversational turns, but there were no improvements in mean z score for child vocalization count. Meaning A multifaceted clinic-based approach to promote parent-child interactions holds some promise, but larger studies are warranted to assess effectiveness and broader generalizability.

show abstract

Social Determinants of Health and Language and Academic Outcomes in Pediatric Cochlear Implantation

Mueller,

Adkins,

Kao

et al. 2024

JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceCochlear implants can restore sound and enable speech and language development for children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. Long-term outcomes of pediatric cochlear implant recipients are variable. Although the association between social determinants of health (SDH) and pediatric cochlear implant outcomes has been explored, the strength of this association has not been quantitatively synthesized in the literature.ObjectiveTo determine the association of SDH with language and academic outcomes in pediatric cochlear implant recipients.Data SourcesIn August 2023, the following databases were searched: Embase.com, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus, APA PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Following duplicate exclusion of 8687 results, 5326 records were finalized.Study SelectionAbstract screening, full-text review, and risk of bias assessment was performed by 1 to 2 reviewers. Articles were included if an effect size for an SDH variable that was associated with measures of language, communication, reading, academics, and quality of life was reported.Main Outcomes and MeasuresA random-effects meta-analysis was performed, with standardized regression coefficients measuring the relative direction and magnitude of a variable association with the outcome of interest.ResultsOf 5326 articles, 40 articles that included a total of 3809 children were included in the systematic review; 20 articles that included a total of 1905 children were included in the meta-analysis. Parental involvement, education level, and low socioeconomic status were moderately to strongly associated with language outcomes (β = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.13-0.48; β = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.29-0.62; β = −0.47; 95% CI, −0.83 to −0.10, respectively). Known determinants of language outcomes, such as the age of cochlear implantation and duration of cochlear implant use, demonstrated moderate to no associations with language outcomes (β = −0.30; 95% CI, −0.43 to −0.17; β = 0.19; 95% CI, −0.26 to 0.63, respectively).Conclusions and RelevanceThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that SDH are associated with childhood language development and academic achievement. In addition to efforts to expedite cochlear implant placement in eligible children, optimal outcomes may be achieved with interventions centered on the child’s home, primary medical care, and school environment.

show abstract

Mapping the Early Language Environment Using All-Day Recordings and Automated Analysis

Abstract: The results offer new insight into the landscape of the early language environment, with clinical implications for identification of children at-risk for impoverished language environments.

Cited by 351 publications

References 49 publications

Language Clearly Matters; Methods Matter Too

Language Clearly Matters; Methods Matter Too

Assessment of a Parent-Child Interaction Intervention for Language Development in Children

Social Determinants of Health and Language and Academic Outcomes in Pediatric Cochlear Implantation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About