The sensitivity of children with SLI to phonotactic probabilities during lexical access

Quémart, Pauline; Maillart, Christelle

doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2016.03.005

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus while children with DLD appear considerably less accurate in the auditory lexical decision task than their age-matched peers, the current estimates suggest that they may not, in general, be significantly slower in making their responses. It is worth noting here that four primary studies investigated but found no evidence of a speed-accuracy trade-off, in which response accuracy may be compromised by a concern to provide a rapid response, or, alternatively, accuracy is high among participants who take considerable time planning a response (Crosbie et al, 2004;Edwards & Lahey, 1996;Pizzioli & Schelstraete, 2013;Quémart & Maillart, 2016). Note also that Edwards and Lahey (1996) and Crosbie et al (2004) included a measure of auditory-vocal reaction time (AVRT), in which participants were required to say 'yes' immediately upon hearing a tone.…”

Section: What Are the Estimated Population Effect Sizes Of The Discrementioning

confidence: 88%

Auditory Lexical Decisions in Developmental Language Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Behavioral Studies

Jones

Brandt

2018

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results broadly support the hypothesis that children with DLD have difficulty in forming detailed lexical representations relative to age- though not language-matched peers. However, further work is required to determine the performance profiles of potential subgroups and the impact of manipulating different lexical characteristics, such as the position and degree of nonword error, phonotactic probability, and semantic network size.

show abstract

Section: What Are the Estimated Population Effect Sizes Of The Discrementioning

confidence: 88%

Auditory Lexical Decisions in Developmental Language Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Behavioral Studies

Jones

Brandt

2018

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results were taken by the authors as evidence for the use of a declarative compensatory strategy by adolescents with a history of DLD once they seem to have based their word/nonword responses on their conceptual knowledge rather than on the computation of the phonological patterns of the words used in the auditory lexical decision task. Even though interesting, this interpretation should be taken with caution, as the lexical decision task manipulating the frequency of occurrence of the words might not be the best proxy for the processing of lexical–phonological information (see Quémart and Maillart, 2016 for a study using an auditory lexical decision task but where the phonotactic probability of the non-words was manipulated instead). Moreover, it is also worth noting that Evans et al (2022) still tested DM and PM functioning by relying on the use of different tasks, and not on the use of the same task manipulating instructions, as we propose in the current work.…”

Section: Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Explicit Instructions Do Not Enhance Auditory Statistical Learning in Children With Developmental Language Disorder: Evidence From Event-Related Potentials

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A current issue in psycholinguistic research is whether the language difficulties exhibited by children with developmental language disorder [DLD, previously labeled specific language impairment (SLI)] are due to deficits in their abilities to pick up patterns in the sensory environment, an ability known as statistical learning (SL), and the extent to which explicit learning mechanisms can be used to compensate for those deficits. Studies designed to test the compensatory role of explicit learning mechanisms in children with DLD are, however, scarce, and the few conducted so far have led to inconsistent results. This work aimed to provide new insights into the role that explicit learning mechanisms might play on implicit learning deficits in children with DLD by resorting to a new approach. This approach involved not only the collection of event-related potentials (ERPs), while preschool children with DLD [relative to typical language developmental (TLD) controls] were exposed to a continuous auditory stream made of the repetition of three-syllable nonsense words but, importantly, the collection of ERPs when the same children performed analogous versions of the same auditory SL task first under incidental (implicit) and afterward under intentional (explicit) conditions. In each of these tasks, the level of predictability of the three-syllable nonsense words embedded in the speech streams was also manipulated (high vs. low) to mimic natural languages closely. At the end of both tasks’ exposure phase, children performed a two-alternative forced-choice (2-AFC) task from which behavioral evidence of SL was obtained. Results from the 2-AFC tasks failed to show reliable signs of SL in both groups of children. The ERPs data showed, however, significant modulations in the N100 and N400 components, taken as neural signatures of word segmentation in the brain, even though a detailed analysis of the neural responses revealed that only children from the TLD group seem to have taken advantage of the previous knowledge to enhance SL functioning. These results suggest that children with DLD showed deficits both in implicit and explicit learning mechanisms, casting doubts on the efficiency of the interventions relying on explicit instructions to help children with DLD to overcome their language difficulties.

show abstract

“…Rose and Royle (1999) found that 20 (pre)teens and adults (aged 9-46 years, from French-speaking families with DLD) performed worse than the control TL group on identification of determiners, prepositions, verb tense, and number agreement or argument-structure errors (e.g., missing complements) in sentences. Using a lexical decision task in which French participants had to identify if a heard word was a pseudoword or not, Quémart and Maillart (2016) found lower performance for the 10-year-old DLD group when compared with children with TL matched on aged or receptive vocabulary.…”

Section: Linguistic Impairments In Adolescents With Dld With a Focus ...mentioning

confidence: 96%

Identifying Linguistic Markers of French-Speaking Teenagers With Developmental Language Disorder: Which Tasks Matter?

Courteau

Loignon

Steinhauer

et al. 2023

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This research aimed to identify reliable tasks discriminating French-speaking adolescents with developmental language disorder (DLD) from their peers with typical language (TL) and to assess which linguistic domains represent areas of particular weakness in DLD. Unlike English, morphosyntax has not been identified as a special area of weakness when compared with lexicosemantics in French preschoolers with DLD. Since there is evidence that subject–verb number agreement is consolidated in later childhood, one might expect morphosyntax to be a particular weakness and marker of French DLD only in (pre)adolescence. Method: We administered 20 subtasks that assessed linguistic and phonological working memory skills of two groups: 17 adolescents clinically identified as having DLD ( M = 14.1 years) and 20 (pre)teens with TL ( M = 12.2 years). Using robust statistics that are less affected by outliers, we selected the most discriminating subtasks between our groups, calculated their optimal cutoff score, and derived diagnostic accuracy statistics. We combined these subtasks in a multivariable model to identify which subtasks contributed the most to the identification of DLD. Results: Seven subtasks were selected as discriminating between our groups, and three showed outstanding diagnostic accuracy: Recalling Sentences, a multiword task assessing lexicosemantic skills, and a subject–verb number agreement production task. When combined, we found that the latter contributed the most to our multivariable model. Conclusion: This study provides evidence that the most relevant markers to identify DLD in French teenagers are tasks assessing lexicosemantics and morphosyntactic domains, and that morphosyntax should be considered an important area of weakness in French-speaking teenagers with DLD. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21753932

show abstract

The sensitivity of children with SLI to phonotactic probabilities during lexical access

Cited by 10 publications

References 83 publications

Auditory Lexical Decisions in Developmental Language Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Behavioral Studies

Auditory Lexical Decisions in Developmental Language Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Behavioral Studies

Explicit Instructions Do Not Enhance Auditory Statistical Learning in Children With Developmental Language Disorder: Evidence From Event-Related Potentials

Identifying Linguistic Markers of French-Speaking Teenagers With Developmental Language Disorder: Which Tasks Matter?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About