Stimulability as a Factor in the Phonological Generalization of Misarticulating Preschool Children

Abstract

The relationship among six functionally misarticulating preschool children’s phoneme-specific stimulability skills, the choice of treatment targets (i.e., stimulable or nonstimulable sounds), and generalization of correct sound production was explored in this prospective study. Each subject [age range of 4:11 (years:months) to 5:61 was taught to produce [r] and one other sound that was absent from his or her phonetic inventory using a contrasting-minimal-pairs production approach. A multiple baseline across behaviors single-subject research design provided experimental control. For 86% of the 28 monitored sounds, generalization was consistent with pretreatment stimulability skills; production of stimulable sounds tended to improve regardless of treatment target. These results suggest that nonstimulable sounds are likely to require direct treatment; thus, generalization probe responses may be maximized by treating nonstimulable sounds rather than stimulable sounds.

A comparison between computer and tabletop delivery of phonology therapy

“…Powell, Elbert and Dinnsen (1991) found that nonstimulable sounds were least likely to change without direct treatment while Miccio, Elbert and Forrest (1999) observed that sounds that were stimulable underwent the most change in the absence of treatment. When stimulable sounds are exposed to phonological intervention, the rate of progress is increased (Rvachew & Nowak, 2001).…”

Estimulabilidade: medida auxiliar na identificação de dificuldade na produção dos sons

“…Some authors use a dynamic evaluation of the stimulability by beginning the test with the application of simple stimuli, and, depending on the child's response, the therapist will be able to define the complexity degree of the next sequence to be tested (sound, syllable, word or sentence) (3,15) . A child is considered to be stimulable when he/she is able to produce at least 10% of the stimuli tested (2,(8)(9)(10)(11) .…”

“…The stimulability test is used by 95% of the North-American speech-language pathologists (7) , who evaluate this ability by using tasks of syllable and word imitation (2,(8)(9)(10)(11) associated with the use of sensory cues (12)(13)(14) . Some authors use a dynamic evaluation of the stimulability by beginning the test with the application of simple stimuli, and, depending on the child's response, the therapist will be able to define the complexity degree of the next sequence to be tested (sound, syllable, word or sentence) (3,15) .…”

Descrição da estimulabilidade e da consistência de fala em crianças com transtorno fonológico

“…Tal critério também foi utilizado por Powell et al, (1991), Goldstein (1996), Lof (1996), Powell e Miccio (1996), Rvachew et al (1999) e Miccio (2002.…”

“…Da mesma maneira, a prova que permite observar a estimulabilidade adequadamente também varia na literatura, sendo as principais a imitação de palavras comuns e imitação de sílabas sem sentido (Carter e Buck, 1958;Farquhar, 1961;Goldstein, 1996;Lof, 1996;Miccio, 2002;Powell et al, 1991;Powell e Miccio, 1996;Adler-Bock et al, 2007).…”