What Our Hands Say: Exploring Gesture Use in Subgroups of Children With Language Delay

O'Neill, Hilary; Chiat, Shula

doi:10.1044/2015_jslhr-l-14-0187

Cited by 27 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this paper we report on a follow-up of children with language delay two years after their initial clinical identification at 2-3 years with receptive/expressive (R/ELD) or expressive-only language delay (ELD). Our first study (O'Neill & Chiat, 2015) found performance on two measures of nonverbal sociocognitive skills, gesture use and symbolic comprehension, were significantly associated with receptive but not expressive language, with the R/ELD group scoring significantly below the ELD group on both. These findings supported interactionist theories proposing that new language forms build on social, motor and cognitive precursors, (Ambridge & Lieven, 2011), and were in line with evidence supporting such theories.…”

mentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Turning to clinical evidence, in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Ozcaliskan, Adamson and Dimitrova, (2016) found that deictic gesture at 30 months predicted vocabulary development a year later, and Yoder, Watson and Lambert (2015), that the use of intentional communication acts including non-conventional and conventional gestures, measured at 12-16 months, was related to receptive and expressive language growth at 2-4 years. Likewise, cross-sectional studies of children with language delay have reported significant correlations between gesture and profiles of receptive and expressive language (O'Neill & Chiat, 2015;Thal, Tobias, & Morrison, 1991;Thal & Tobias, 1992;Thal & Tobias, 1994), with different uses of gesture sequences and single gesture types related to single word production versus comprehension across a series of studies by Thal and colleagues (Thal, Marchman, & Tomblin, 2013).…”

Section: Gesture Use and Language Developmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Our Hands Tell Us: A Two-Year Follow-Up Investigating Outcomes in Subgroups of Children With Language Delay

O'Neill

Murphy

Chiat

2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study followed up children identified with expressive language delay (ELD) or receptive/expressive language delay (R/ELD) at 2 years of age, Time 1 (T1), in order to identify their language profiles at 4–5 years, Time 2 (T2), and explore relationships to T1 language, gesture use, and symbolic comprehension. Method Nineteen of 22 children were seen at follow-up (9 of 10 from R/ELD group, 10 of 12 from ELD group). T1 measures assessed receptive and expressive language, gesture use, and symbolic comprehension. At T2, we assessed receptive and expressive language, sentence repetition, and expressive phonology. Results Outcomes for the R/ELD group were significantly poorer, with all children continuing to have delay in receptive and/or expressive language compared to just 20% of the ELD group. Expressive phonology delay was common in both groups. T1 receptive language showed the most pervasive correlations with T2 language measures, but categorical performance on all three T1 measures correctly predicted language outcomes in 16–17 of the 19 children. Conclusion Findings add to evidence that receptive language is a strong predictor of outcomes. Gesture use and symbolic comprehension are also strong predictors and clinically valuable as part of play-based assessments with implications for theoretical understanding and intervention planning.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Gesture Use and Language Developmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

What Our Hands Tell Us: A Two-Year Follow-Up Investigating Outcomes in Subgroups of Children With Language Delay

O'Neill

Murphy

Chiat

2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In typical development, significant longitudinal relations have been observed between gesture use and receptive (Watt et al 2006, Rowe et al 2008 as well as spoken (Iverson et al 2008) language. In comparison, cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of toddlers with receptive and expressive language delay, primary delays in expressive language (i.e., later talkers), and Down syndrome have found that receptive (but not expressive) language ability was positively correlated with gesture use (e.g., O'Neill and Chiat 2015, Thal et al 1991, Zampini and D'Odorico 2009 In ASD, early gesture use has been shown to be associated with both expressive and receptive language (e.g., Dimitrova et al 2016, Luyster et al 2008, Ozcaliskan et al 2015, above and beyond nonverbal cognition (Charman et al 2003). However, receptive language has been found to be more closely associated with gestures than expressive language in at least one study (Luyster et al 2007a).…”

Section: Relationship Between Gesture and Languagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…) language. In comparison, cross‐sectional and longitudinal studies of toddlers with receptive and expressive language delay, primary delays in expressive language (i.e., later talkers), and Down syndrome have found that receptive (but not expressive) language ability was positively correlated with gesture use (e.g., O'Neill and Chiat , Thal et al . , Zampini and D'Odorico ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling gesture use and early language development in autism spectrum disorder

Manwaring

Mead

Swineford

et al. 2017

Intl J Lang & Comm Disor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Nonverbal communication abilities, including gesture use, are impaired in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, little is known about how common gestures may influence or be influenced by other areas of development. Aims This study examined relationships among gesture, fine motor, and language in young children with ASD compared to a comparison group using multiple measures and methods in a structural equation modeling framework. Methods & Procedures Participants included 110 children with ASD and a non-ASD comparison group of 87 children (that included children with DD or TD), from 12 to 48 months of age. A construct of gesture use as measured by the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales–Developmental Profile Caregiver Questionnaire (CQ) and the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS), as well fine motor from the Mullen Scales of Early Learning and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-II (VABS-II) was examined using second-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A series of structural equation models then examined concurrent relationships between the aforementioned latent gesture construct and expressive and receptive language. A series of hierarchical regression analyses was run in a subsample of 36 children with ASD with longitudinal data to determine how gesture factor scores predicted later language outcomes. Outcomes & Results Across study groups, the gesture CFA model with indicators of gesture use from both the CQ (parent-reported) and ADOS (direct observation), and measures of fine motor provided good fit with all indicators significantly and strongly loading onto one gesture factor. This model of gesture use, controlling for age, was found to strongly correlate with concurrent expressive and receptive language. The correlations between gestures and concurrent language were similar in magnitude in both the ASD and the non-ASD group. In the longitudinal subsample of children with ASD, gestures at Time 1 predicted later receptive (but not expressive) language outcomes on the VABS-II, after controlling for nonverbal cognition, ASD severity, age, and Time 1 language. Conclusions & Implications This study extends research on the relationship of nonverbal communication and language by supporting the idea of an underlying construct of gesture use that includes fine motor ability and relates to language in young children with ASD. This further supports theories espousing developmental influences of motor and nonverbal communication strategies as important in early language learning.

show abstract

“…For children with LD, Bello et al (2018) found that conspicuously more of them do not produce declarative pointing gestures compared to TD children. Beyond that, O'Neill andChiat (2015) andO'Neill et al (2019) showed that children with a receptive-expressive LD score more poorly in gesture production tasks than children with an expressive-only LD and that the performance in the gesture tasks in turn predicts later language skills. In earlier publications concerning the sample presented here, we found that children who do not point with the extended index finger at 12 months are at higher risk for LD at 2;0 compared to children who do produce index-finger points at 12 months of age (Lüke et al, 2017a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Communication System: Gesture and Language Acquisition in Typically Developing Children and Children With LD and DLD

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gesture and language development are strongly connected to each other. Two types of gestures in particular are analyzed regarding their role for language acquisition: pointing and iconic gestures. With the present longitudinal study, the predictive values of index-finger pointing at 12 months and the comprehension of iconic gestures at 3;0 years for later language skills in typically developing (TD) children and in children with a language delay (LD) or developmental language disorder (DLD) are examined. Forty-two monolingual German children and their primary caregivers participated in the study and were followed longitudinally from 1;0 to 6;0 years. Within a total of 14 observation sessions, the gestural and language abilities of the children were measured using standardized as well as ad hoc tests, parent questionnaires and semi-natural interactions between the child and their caregivers. At the age of 2;0 years, 10 of the 42 children were identified as having a LD. The ability to point with the extended index finger at 1;0 year is predictive for language skills at 5;0 and 6;0 years. This predictive effect is mediated by the language skills of the children at 3;0 years. The comprehension of iconic gestures at 3;0 years correlates with index-finger pointing at 1;0 year and also with earlier and later language skills. It mediates the predictive value of index-finger pointing at 1;0 year for grammar skills at 5;0 and 6;0 years. Children with LD develop the ability to understand the iconicity in gestures later than TD children and score lower in language tests until the age of 6;0 years. The language differences between these two groups of children persist partially until the age of 5;0 years even when the two children with manifested DLD within the group of children with LD are excluded from analyses. Beyond that age, no differences in the language skills between children with and without a history of LD are found when children with a manifest DLD are excluded. The findings support the assumption of an integrated speech-gesture communication system, which functions similarly in TD children and children with LD or DLD, but with a time delay.

show abstract

What Our Hands Say: Exploring Gesture Use in Subgroups of Children With Language Delay

Cited by 27 publications

References 28 publications

What Our Hands Tell Us: A Two-Year Follow-Up Investigating Outcomes in Subgroups of Children With Language Delay

What Our Hands Tell Us: A Two-Year Follow-Up Investigating Outcomes in Subgroups of Children With Language Delay

Modelling gesture use and early language development in autism spectrum disorder

Integrated Communication System: Gesture and Language Acquisition in Typically Developing Children and Children With LD and DLD

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About