Temperamental predictors of linguistic style during multiword acquisition

Dixon, Wallace E.; Shore, Cecilia

doi:10.1016/s0163-6383(97)90065-5

Cited by 54 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Correlational findings have been consistent with this hypothesis (Dixon & Shore, 1997;Dixon & Smith, 2000;Kubicek, et al, 2001;Morales, et al, 2000). Temperamentally long-attending children have been found to have larger vocabularies.…”

Section: Nih Public Accessmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…Children low in executive control should be more subject to the attractive or aversive, but nevertheless attention-grabbing features of ambient environmental activity, and less likely to return to the word-learning task at hand. This line of reasoning leads to the empirical expectation that children high in executive control should be relatively resistant to environmental distractions during word learning and should, over developmental time, enjoy a word-learning advantage over children low in executive control.Correlational findings have been consistent with this hypothesis (Dixon & Shore, 1997;Dixon & Smith, 2000;Kubicek, et al, 2001;Morales, et al, 2000). Temperamentally long-attending children have been found to have larger vocabularies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 69%

“…The ECBQ consists of 201 items involving toddlers' day-to-day behaviors determined by parents to have taken place in the previous two weeks. Although the ECBQ assesses 18 fine-grained subdimensions of temperament, including such dimensions as activity level, attentional focusing, fear, sociability, and shyness; the attentional focusing measure was of primary interest in the present study because its predecessor, duration of orientation, was found to correlate with productive and receptive vocabulary in previous research (Dixon & Shore, 1997;Dixon & Smith, 2000;Morales et al, 2001), and is presumed to reflect the central attentional component of executive control. Among the 12 items included on this scale are, "When engaged in play with his/her favorite toy, how often did your child play for more than 10 minutes?…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Temperament, distraction, and learning in toddlerhood

Dixon

Salley

Clements

2006

Infant Behavior and Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The word and non-word learning abilities of toddlers were tested under various conditions of environmental distraction, and evaluated with respect to children's temperamental attentional focus. Thirty-nine children and their mothers visited the lab at child age 21-months, where children were exposed to fast-mapping word learning trials and nonlinguistic sequential learning trials. It was found that both word and nonword-learning was adversely affected by the presentation of environmental distractions. But it was also found that the effect of the distractions sometimes depended on children's level of attentional focus. Specifically, children high in attentional focus were less affected by environmental distractions than children low in attentional focus when attempting to learn from a model, whereas children low in attentional focus demonstrated little learning from the model. Translationally, these results may be of use to child health-care providers investigating possible sources of cognitive and language delay. Temperament, Distraction, and Learning in ToddlerhoodThe fields of temperament and cognitive development have followed long and productive paths, even though they seem to have done so in relative isolation from one another. Temperament researchers have made strides in identifying the nature of early temperament and its potential biological underpinnings, and they have identified a host of social-emotional sequelae of early individual differences in temperament (e.g., Guerin, Gottfried, Oliver, & Thomas, 2003;Molfese & Molfese, 2000). Cognitive development researchers have also made significant strides toward understanding basic mechanisms underlying attention (e.g., Colombo, 2004;Richards, 2004;Rose, Feldman, & Jankowski, 2004;Ruff & Rothbart, 1996) and memory (e.g., Bauer, 2004;Hayne, 2004), among other cognitive domains. Unfortunately, few researchers have undertaken empirical efforts to document interrelations between temperament and basic cognition (e.g., Wolfe & Bell, 2004); although Fagen and colleagues have amply demonstrated that aspects of temperamental fussiness (i.e., affective distress) negatively impact children's performance on cognitive tasks (Fagen, Ohr, Fleckenstein, & Ribner, 1985;Fagen, Ohr, Singer, & Fleckenstein, 1987;Fleckenstein & Fagen, 1994). Much would be gained were researchers able to link individual differences in cognitive function to individual differences in any of a number of domains of temperament, because such an effort would likely inform a better understanding of intra domain individual differences.To the extent that temperament-cognitive relationships have been examined, a major focus seems to have been on temperament-language relationships (specifically vocabulary, e.g., Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Wallace E. Dixon, Jr., Department of Psychology, East Tennessee State University, P.O. Box 70649, Johnson City, TN,37614. E-mail: dixonw@etsu.edu.. Author Note This work was supported by a NIH/NICHD Grant HD043865 to the first au...

show abstract

Section: Nih Public Accessmentioning

confidence: 69%

mentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Temperament, distraction, and learning in toddlerhood

Dixon

Salley

Clements

2006

Infant Behavior and Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a developing body of knowledge suggesting that aspects of temperament may play a role in speech-language development and disorders in general (e.g., Dixon & Shore, 1997;Dixon & Smith, 2000; Karrass & BraungartRieker, 2003;Paul & Kellogg, 1997). Evidence has linked aspects of emotional reactivity to "late talking" (Paul & Kellogg, 1997), as well as stuttering in young children (e.g., Embrechts et al, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is unfortunate given that emotional reactivity and regulation have been shown to influence a wide range of developmentally important outcomes such as communication (Dixon & Shore, 1997;Dixon & Smith, 2000;Karrass & Braungart-Rieker, 2003;Paul & Kellogg, 1997), school performance (Ialongo, Edelsohn, & Kellam, 2001), and psychopathology (Eisenberg et al, 1993;Eisenberg, Fabes et al, 1997) in children who do not stutter.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relation of emotional reactivity and regulation to childhood stuttering

Karrass¹,

Walden²,

Conture³

et al. 2006

Journal of Communication Disorders

175

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study was to examine relations between children's emotional reactivity, emotion regulation and stuttering. Participants were 65 preschool children who stutter (CWS) and 56 preschool children who do not stutter (CWNS). Parents completed the Behavior Style Questionnaire (BSQ) [McDevitt S. C., & Carey, W. B. (1978). A measure of temperament in 3-7 year old children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines,19,[245][246][247][248][249][250][251][252][253]. Three groups of BSQ items measuring emotional reactivity, emotion regulation, and attention regulation were identified by experts in children's emotions. Findings indicated that when compared to their normally fluent peers, CWS were significantly more reactive, significantly less able to regulate their emotions, and had significantly poorer attention regulation, even after controlling for gender, age, and language abilities. Findings suggest that the relatively greater emotional reactivity experienced by preschool children who stutter, together with their relative inability to flexibly control their attention and regulate the emotions they experience, may contribute to the difficulties these children have establishing reasonably fluent speech and language.Learning outcomes-The reader should be able to (1) define emotional reactivity and emotion regulation, (2) explain how emotional reactivity and emotion regulation relate to preschool stuttering, and (3) understand recent empirical evidence linking reactivity and regulation to preschool stuttering.Despite an extensive literature in psychology regarding emotional reactivity and regulation (see Eisenberg & Fabes, 1992, for a review) and an equally extensive literature in speechlanguage pathology regarding stuttering (e.g., Bloodstein, 1995; Conture, 2001; Guitar, 1998), in recent years there has been relatively little intersection between speech-language pathology approaches to stuttering and psychological approaches to emotion, stress and coping (for early, notable exceptions, see Fitzsimons, 1960, and Brutten & Shoemaker, 1967). This is unfortunate given that emotional reactivity and regulation have been shown to influence a wide range of developmentally important outcomes such as communication (Dixon & Shore, 1997;Dixon & Smith, 2000;Karrass & Braungart-Rieker, 2003;Paul & Kellogg, 1997), school performance (Ialongo, Edelsohn, & Kellam, 2001), and psychopathology (Eisenberg et al., 1993; Eisenberg, Fabes et al., 1997) in children who do not stutter.Given the relations among emotional reactivity and regulation and communicative development, there is reason to expect that reactivity and regulation may influence childhood stuttering, or at least possibly exacerbate or maintain the problem. This expectation is consistent with recent reviews and findings from empirical studies regarding the emotional development and behavior of children who stutter (e.g., Anderson, Pellowski, Conture & Kelly, 2003; Embrechts, Ebben, Franke & van de Poel, 1998; Wakaba, 19...

show abstract

Working memory and inhibitory control in early childhood: Contributions from physiology, temperament, and language

Wolfe¹,

Bell²

2003

Developmental Psychobiology

178

187

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the cognitive skills of working memory and inhibitory control (WMIC) in relation to physiological functioning, temperament, and language in early childhood. WMIC skills were assessed in twenty-five 4 1 2 -yearold children using the day-night Stroop-like task and the yes-no task; each task required the child to remember two rules and to inhibit a dominant response. Electroencephalogram (EEG) and heart period (HP) were recorded during baseline and WMIC tasks. An increase in 6-to 9-Hz EEG power from baseline to task was found for the medial frontal region. In addition, a decrease in HP (i.e., an increase in heart rate) was found from baseline to task. Associations were found between performance on the WMIC tasks and scales of the Children's Behavioral Questionnaire (CBQ) related to the effortful control of behavior. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III (PPVT-III) distinguished between high and low WMIC performance. Results of a discriminant function analysis indicated that physiology, temperament, and language were able to correctly predict 90% of WMIC performance. Keywords: working memory; inhibitory control; prefrontal cortex; temperament; language; EEG; heart period Executive function skills, such as working memory, inhibitory control, planning, and attentional flexibility, are typically associated with the prefrontal cortex. Two of these skills, working memory and inhibitory control (WMIC), have been the focus of much behavioral

show abstract

Temperamental predictors of linguistic style during multiword acquisition

Cited by 54 publications

References 8 publications

Temperament, distraction, and learning in toddlerhood

Temperament, distraction, and learning in toddlerhood

Relation of emotional reactivity and regulation to childhood stuttering

Working memory and inhibitory control in early childhood: Contributions from physiology, temperament, and language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About