Search

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between speech perception, speech production, and vocabulary abilities in children with and without speech sound disorders (SSDs), analyzing the data both by group and continuously. Method: Sixty-one Australian English--speaking children aged 48-69 months participated in this study. Children's speech production abilities ranged along the continuum from SSDs through to typical speech. Their vocabulary abilities ranged along the continuum from typical to above average ("lexically precocious"). Children completed routine speech and language assessments in addition to an experimental Australian English lexical and phonetic judgment task. Results: When analyzing data by group, there was no significant difference between the speech perception ability of children with SSDs and that of children without SSDs. Children with above-average vocabularies had significantly better speech perception ability than children with average vocabularies. When analyzing data continuously, speech production and vocabulary were both significant positive predictors of variance in speech perception ability, both individually in simple linear regression and when combined in multiple linear regression. There was also a significant positive correlation between perception and production of two of the four target phonemes tested (i.e., /k/ and [Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between speech perception, speech production, and vocabulary abilities in children with and without speech sound disorders (SSDs), analyzing the data both by group and continuously. Method: Sixty-one Australian English--speaking children aged 48--69 months participated in this study. Children's speech production abilities ranged along the continuum from SSDs through to typical speech. Their vocabulary abilities ranged along the continuum from typical to above average ("lexically precocious"). Children completed routine speech and language assessments in addition to an experimental Australian English lexical and phonetic judgment task. Results: When analyzing data by group, there was no significant difference between the speech perception ability of children with SSDs and that of children without SSDs. Children with above-average vocabularies had significantly better speech perception ability than children with average vocabularies. When analyzing data continuously, speech production and vocabulary were both significant positive predictors of variance in speech perception ability, both individually in simple linear regression and when combined in multiple linear regression. There was also a significant positive correlation between perception and production of two of the four target phonemes tested (i.e., /k/ and [voiceless postalveolar fricative]) among children in the SSD group. Conclusions: Results from this study provide further insight into the complex relationship between speech perception, speech production, and vocabulary abilities in children. While there is a clinical and important need for categorical distinctions between SSDs and typically developing speech, findings further highlight the value of investigating speech production and vocabulary abilities continuously and categorically. By capturing the heterogeneity among children's speech production and vocabulary abilities, we can advance our understanding of SSDs in children. ) among children in the SSD group. Conclusions: Results from this study provide further insight into the complex relationship between speech perception, speech production, and vocabulary abilities in children. While there is a clinical and important need for categorical distinctions between SSDs and typically developing speech, findings further highlight the value of investigating speech production and vocabulary abilities continuously and categorically. By capturing the heterogeneity among children's speech production and vocabulary abilities, we can advance our understanding of SSDs in children.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate whether preschool- and early school-age children with speech sound disorders (SSDs) have difficulties with speech perception. Method: Systematic searching of 8 electronic databases identified 73 eligible studies across 71 articles examining the speech perception skills of children with SSDs. The findings and methodological characteristics of each study were reviewed, and the reporting of methodological information in each article was rated. A meta-analysis was conducted with studies that used the most common type of speech perception assessment task--lexical and/or phonetic judgment tasks. Results: Across 60 of 73 studies, some or all children with SSDs were reported to have difficulties with speech perception. The meta-analysis showed a significant difference between children with SSDs and children with typically developing speech on lexical and/or phonetic judgment tasks. Conclusion: Results from the meta-analysis demonstrate that children with SSDs have difficulties with speech perception. This appears to be the case for some but not all children with SSDs. The findings from this systematic review and meta-analysis also provide insight into the complex range of methodological issues involved in the study of speech perception in children with SSDs and the need for further research.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to describe the speech production, speech perception, vocabulary, and word learning abilities of lexically precocious 4-year-old children with phonological impairment, in an effort to better understand the underlying nature of phonological impairment in children. Method: Using a case series approach, we identified four children with phonological impairment and precocious vocabulary abilities. Each child completed routine speech production and vocabulary assessments, as well as experimental speech perception and word learning tasks. The results from these tasks were then used to create profiles of each child's individual strengths and needs across the abilities assessed. Results: Although all four children presented with phonological impairment and lexically precocious receptive and expressive vocabulary, they differed in their specific speech errors. One child presented with phonological speech errors only, while the other three children presented with an interdental lisp alongside their phonological errors. Three children presented with average speech perception abilities, and one child presented with poorer speech perception. The same three children also showed some learning of novel nonwords 1 week post-initial exposure, while the other child showed no evidence of word learning 1 week post-initial exposure. Conclusions: The clinical profiles of lexically precocious children with phonological impairment offered different insights into the nature of the problem. Although one child appeared to present with underspecified underlying representations of words, the other three children appeared to present with wellspecified underlying representations. Of the three children with well-specified underlying representations, two appeared to have difficulty abstracting particular rules of the ambient phonological system. Further research is needed to improve our understanding of the underlying nature of phonological impairment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Children with phonological impairment present with pattern‐based errors in their speech production. While some children have difficulties with speech perception and/or the establishment of robust underlying phonological representations, the nature of phonological impairment in children is still not well understood. Given that phonological and lexical development are closely linked, one way to better understand the nature of the problem in phonological impairment is to examine word learning abilities in children. Aims: To examine word learning and its relationship with speech perception, speech production and vocabulary knowledge in children aged 4–5 years. There were two variables of interest: speech production abilities ranging from phonological impairment to typical speech; and vocabulary abilities ranging from typical to above average ('lexically precocious'). Methods & Procedures: Participants were 49 Australian‐English‐speaking children aged 48–69 months. Children were each taught four novel non‐words (out of a selection of eight) through stories, and word learning was assessed at 1 week post‐initial exposure. Word learning was assessed using two measures: confrontation naming and story retell naming. Data were analysed by group using independent‐samples t‐tests and Mann–Whitney U‐tests, and continuously using multiple linear regression. Outcomes & Results: There was no significant difference in word learning ability of children with and without phonological impairment, but regardless of speech group, children with above average vocabulary had significantly better word learning abilities than children with average vocabulary. In multiple linear regression, vocabulary was the only significant predictor of variance in word learning ability. Conclusions & Implications: Children with phonological impairment can be lexically precocious and learn new words like their peers without phonological impairment. Contrary to expectations, vocabulary knowledge rather than expressive phonological ability explained variance in measures of word learning. These findings question an assumption that children with phonological impairment have underspecified phonological representations. They also highlight the heterogeneity among children with phonological impairment and the need to better understand the nature of their difficulty learning the phonological system of the ambient language. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: There is limited research examining the word learning abilities of children with phonological impairment. Most previous research focuses on word properties such as phonotactic probability and neighbourhood density. Within the existing literature there are different reports and conclusions regarding the word learning abilities of children with phonological impairment and whether their word learning differs from that of children with typically developing speech. What this study adds to existing knowledge: This study found that vocabulary was the strongest predictor of word learning across children with and without phonological impairment. There was no significant difference in word learning ability between children with and without phonological impairment. However, children with lexically precocious vocabulary abilities were significantly better at word learning than children with average vocabulary abilities. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Findings from this study support the importance of assessing and considering measures of word learning—including vocabulary—when working with children with phonological impairment. This study indicates that it is possible to use stories coupled with measures of confrontation naming and story retell to gain deeper insight into children's word learning abilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]