The role of prematurity and socioeconomic status in the onset of canonical babbling in infants

Eilers, Rebecca E.; Oller, D. Kimbrough; Levine, Sharyse; Basinger, Devorah; Lynch, Michael P.; Urbano, Richard C.

doi:10.1016/0163-6383(93)80037-9

Cited by 150 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

109

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At older ages, the differences in visual development between LR preterm infants and FT infants disappear (28). Eilers et al (30), who addressed differences in speech development, found that preterm infants developed canonical babbling at an earlier age than FT infants did. It is conceivable that the advantages that preterm infants might have from early extrauterine experience are subtle, mostly transient, and often occluded by the negative effects associated with preterm birth.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kinematic Quality of Reaching Movements in Preterm Infants

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many preterm infants may experience so-called minor developmental disorders; however, in general, the problems in motor behavior are not detected until school age. To introduce therapies aimed at the prevention of these problems, we need to increase our knowledge of motor function and dysfunction at early age. The present study focused on the organization of reaching movements in full-term and preterm infants without cerebral palsy. The reaching behavior of premature infants (n ϭ 63) was assessed longitudinally at the corrected ages of 4 and 6 mo. Clinical assessments were made at 6 and 12 mo of age. On the basis of the infant's morbidity during the early stay in the neonatal intensive care unit, the preterm infants were allocated into a high-risk and a low-risk group. Results from a previous study in full-term infants (n ϭ 13) were included. Kinematics of reaching movements in supine position were measured, and the analysis focused on movement velocity and movement units. A compound parameter of kinematic variables was created, reflecting the quality of reaching movements. The present study showed that at the age of 4 mo, low-risk preterm infants showed more often optimal reaching behavior than full-term and preterm high-risk infants. This better reaching performance was related to a better general motor and behavioral development during the first year of life. At the age of 6 mo, the advantage of the low-risk group in reaching behavior had disappeared and a disadvantage in the form of nonoptimal reaching behavior of the high-risk group emerged. There is an increasing awareness that many preterm infants may experience subtle long-term morbidities. Usually these so-called minor developmental disorders, such as clumsiness and specific learning disorders, are identified first at school age (1-3). It has been questioned whether these minor developmental disorders can be detected at early age, so that intervention aiming at the prevention of problems that interfere with academic achievement could be introduced timely.Recently, evidence has been provided that early motor development in preterm infants without major developmental disorders differs from that of full-term (FT) infants. The majority of studies focused on postural development. They indicated that so-called "low-risk" preterm infants show significantly more often an exaggerated trunk extension (4, 5) or "transient dystonia" (6, 7) than FT infants. Van der Fits et al. (8), who studied the development of postural adjustments during reaching, reported that low-risk (LR) preterm infants showed an excessive amount of postural activity. Moreover, the postural adjustments of the preterm infants were temporally disorganized and could not be modulated to task-specific conditions, such as the velocity of the reaching arm and sitting position. The mild dysfunctions in postural control of preterm infants are related to a poorer quality of reaching and grasping at the age of 1 y (9, 10) and possibly also to motor dysfunctions (7) or learning problems (6) at school age...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kinematic Quality of Reaching Movements in Preterm Infants

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That this relationship may suggest a developmental link between banging and babbling is underscored by the fact that it appears to be preserved in populations characterized by delayed or atypical patterns of development, including Down syndrome (Cobo-Lewis et al, 1996), Williams syndrome (Masataka, 2001), and preterm infants (Eilers et al, 1993).…”

Section: Bodily Action and Speech Sound Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, in typically developing infants, there is a strong, positive relationship between the ages at which hand banging and canonical babbling emerge (e.g., Cobo-Lewis, Oller, Lynch, & Levine, 1996;Eilers, Oller, Levine, Basinger, Lynch, & Urbano, 1993). That this relationship may suggest a developmental link between banging and babbling is underscored by the fact that it appears to be preserved in populations characterized by delayed or atypical patterns of development, including Down syndrome (Cobo-Lewis et al, 1996), Williams syndrome (Masataka, 2001), and preterm infants (Eilers et al, 1993).…”

Section: Bodily Action and Speech Sound Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Putting Language Back in the Body: Speech and Gesture on Three Time Frames

Kelly¹,

Iverson²,

Terranova³

et al. 2002

Developmental Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates the role that nonverbal actions play in language processing over 3 different time frames. First, we speculate that nonverbal actions played a role in how formal language systems emerged from our primate ancestors over evolutionary time. Next, we hypothesize that if nonverbal behaviors played a foundational role in the emergence of language over evolution, these actions should influence how children learn language in the present. Finally, we argue that nonverbal actions continue to play a role for adults in the moment-to-moment processing of language. Throughout, we take an embodied view of language and argue that the neural, cognitive, and social components of language processing are firmly grounded in bodily action.Human language is special because it is at the pinnacle of the mind's capabilities and is most notably what separates our minds from the minds of other thinking animals. Language is so special, in fact, that many people have argued that there is a designated language device built into the human brain at birth. These views, madeRequests for reprints should be sent to

show abstract

“…Thus, for example, Locke, Bekken, McMinn-Larson, and Wein (1995) have demonstrated that amount of rhythmic arm shaking in an experimental session is related to babbling experience; rate of shaking was relatively low among prebabblers, increased substantially among infants who had just begun to babble, and then declined (but remained above that for prebabblers) among infants who had been babbling for longer periods. Such findings have been interpreted as suggesting that the coincident changes in rhythmicity in infant vocalization and motor behavior reflect control by a common underlying mechanism (see Eilers et al, 1993;Ramsay, 1984Ramsay, , 1985.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among older infants, increased production of upper limb rhythmicities has been shown to relate to age of onset of reduplicated babbling (production of repeated sequences of identical syllables (e.g., [bababa]; Cobo-Lewis, Oller, Lynch, & Levine, 1996;Eilers et al, 1993;Ejiri, 1998). Thus, for example, Locke, Bekken, McMinn-Larson, and Wein (1995) have demonstrated that amount of rhythmic arm shaking in an experimental session is related to babbling experience; rate of shaking was relatively low among prebabblers, increased substantially among infants who had just begun to babble, and then declined (but remained above that for prebabblers) among infants who had been babbling for longer periods.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Infant Vocal–Motor Coordination: Precursor to the Gesture–Speech System?

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to provide a general picture of infant vocal -motor coordination and test predictions generated by Iverson and Thelen's (1999) model of the development of the gesture -speech system. Forty-seven 6-to 9-month-old infants were videotaped with a primary caregiver during rattle and toy play. Results indicated an age-related increase in frequency of vocal -motor coordination, greater coordination with arm (specifically right arm) than leg or torso movements, and a temporal pattern similar to that in adult gesture -speech coproductions. Rhythmic vocalizations (consonant -vowel repetitions) were more likely to occur with than without rhythmic movement, and with rhythmic manual than with nonmanual activity, and the rate of vocalmanual coordination was higher in babblers than in prebabblers.

show abstract

The role of prematurity and socioeconomic status in the onset of canonical babbling in infants

Cited by 150 publications

References 47 publications

Kinematic Quality of Reaching Movements in Preterm Infants

Kinematic Quality of Reaching Movements in Preterm Infants

Putting Language Back in the Body: Speech and Gesture on Three Time Frames

Infant Vocal–Motor Coordination: Precursor to the Gesture–Speech System?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About