introduc)on method*con)nued* results* - utah state university · 2012. 3. 1. · introduc)on...

1
Introduc)on Par)cipants All par’cipants a-ended a LSL preschool program and used hearing technology (HA= 7 ; CI= 6). There were a total of 13 par’cipants (M= 7 , F= 6) who ranged in age from 3 years 5 months to 6 years 5 months (Mean=4;10). Method con)nued Results Discussion Early iden’fica’on and interven’on have led to improved outcomes of children with hearing loss (HL) using Listening and Spoken Language (LSL) (e.g., Hayes, Geers, Trieman, & Moog, 2009). Pilot study indicated that narra)ve retells are a feasible way of assessing language in preschool children and may provide a be:er descrip)on of overall language skills and development of children with HL (Olszewski & Blaiser, 2011). Narra)ves are are mul’sentence accounts of real or imagined events in which characters engage in goal directed ac’ons. Language Model No Picture Support (NP) Picture Support (P) Simple (S) all sentences consisted of noun and verb 1 2 Balanced (B) sentences that were simple, coordinated, and subordinated were evenly represented 3 4 Research Ques)on: Method The purpose of this study was to compare different narra’ve s’muli to determine the effect of linguis)c complexity and picture support on the retells of preschool children with HL on outcome measures of: Language Produc)vity: Number of Total Words (NTW) & Number of Different Words (NDW) Language Complexity: Mean Length of U-erance (MLU) Procedures Narra’ve models were adapted from The Test of Narra+ve Retell (TNR; www.languagedynamicsgroup.com) subtest of the Narra+ve Language Measure (NLM). Each of the four narra’ve models was read to par’cipants in a random order and audio recorded to transcribe later. S)mulus #3: Balanced Story, No Picture Support Examiner says, “I’m going to tell you a story. Please listen carefully. When I am finished, you are going to tell me the same story. Are you ready?” Rachel was holding a balloon at a store [S]. Her mom bought it because she had been good at the store [SU]. They walked outside [S]. And the big balloon quickly flew up in the sky [C]. She was sad because her balloon floated away [SU]. Rachel asked her mom for another balloon since it flew away [SU]. And then her mom bought another balloon [C]. Rachel held onto this one [S]. And it did not float away [C]. Examiner says, “Thanks for listening. Now you tell me that story.” Note. No Picture Support= stories were told auditorily. Picture Support=Stories were told auditorily with a colored line drawing picture provided for the dura’on of the story and retell. Table 1 Counterbalanced Narra+ve Retell Models Narra’ve retells may be more sensi’ve in monitoring gramma’cality than standardized measures. Language Produc)vity Measures Balanced stories elicited the largest language produc’vity measures. Language produc’vity increased with picture support. Language Complexity Measures Balanced stories elicited the most complex u-erances. Complexity increased with without picture support. Results indicated that the type of narra’ve s’mulus may be important when considering expressive output of preschoolers with hearing loss. Figure 1. Examiner procedures for narra’ve model. Narra’ve was adapted to include 3 simple u-erances, 3 coordinated u-erances, and 3 subordinated u-erance. [S]= Simple u-erance; [SU]= Subordinated u-erance; [C]= Coordinated u-erance. Figure 2. Example of a 5 year old par’cipant narra’ve retell (S’mulus 3: Balanced with No Picture Support). Narra’ve Analysis: NTW = 22; NDW = 17; MLU = 5.5; Standardized Measures: EOWPVT = 94; ROWPVT = 95; CELF Recep’ve = 100; CELFExpressive = 91, Preschool Language Scale (PLS) = 85. + [BeginStory3] C Rachel hold the balloon. C And it quickly float away. C And she asked her mom get another balloon. C And it didn’t fly away. + [BeginStory3] Language Produc)vity Measures: Number of total words (NTW) and Number of different words (NDW) Table 4 Average NDW Between Stories Number of Different Words Table 2 Average NTW Between Stories Table 5 NDW Results by Time Table 3 NTW Results by Time Table 7 MLU Results by Time Number of Total Words 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Story 1 S, NP Story 2 S, P Story 3 B, NP Story 4 B, P Mean Length U:erance Number of Different Words Number of Total Words 0 5 10 15 20 25 Story 1 S, NP Story 2 S, P Story 3 B, NP Story 4 B, P 0 5 10 15 Story 1 S, NP Story 2 S, P Story 3 B, NP Story 4 B, P 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 0 5 10 15 20 25 Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 Mean Length U:erance Language Complexity Measure: Mean length of u-erance (MLU) Table 6 Average of MLU Between Stories

Upload: others

Post on 22-Aug-2020

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Introduc)on Method*con)nued* Results* - Utah State University · 2012. 3. 1. · Introduc)on Parcipants! All#par’cipants#aended#aLSL#preschool#program# and#used#hearing#technology#(HA=7#;#CI=6).#!

Introduc)on  

Par)cipants  ² All  par'cipants  a-ended  a  LSL  preschool  program  

and  used  hearing  technology  (HA=  7  ;  CI=  6).  

² There  were  a  total  of  13  par'cipants  (M=  7  ,  F=  6)  who  ranged  in  age  from  3  years  5  months  to  6  years  5  months  (Mean=4;10).  

Method  con)nued   Results  

Discussion  

² Early  iden'fica'on  and  interven'on  have  led    to  improved  outcomes  of  children  with  hearing  loss  (HL)  using  Listening  and  Spoken  Language  (LSL)    (e.g.,  Hayes,  Geers,  Trieman,  &  Moog,  2009).  

 ² Pilot  study  indicated  that  narra)ve  re-­‐tells  are  a  

feasible  way  of  assessing  language  in  preschool  children  and  may  provide  a  be:er  descrip)on  of  overall  language  skills  and  development  of  children  with  HL    (Olszewski  &  Blaiser,  2011).    

 ² Narra)ves  are  are  mul'-­‐sentence  accounts  of  real  or  

imagined  events  in  which  characters  engage  in  goal-­‐directed  ac'ons.    

   

Language  Model  

 No  

Picture  Support  (NP)  

   

Picture  Support  (P)  

Simple  (S)  all  sentences  consisted  of  noun  

and  verb    

 1  

 2  

Balanced  (B)  sentences  that  were  simple,  

coordinated,  and  subordinated  were  evenly  represented  

   

3  

   

4  

Research  Ques)on:  

Method  

 

The  purpose  of  this  study  was  to  compare  different  narra've  s'muli  to  determine  the  effect  of  linguis)c  complexity  and  picture  support  on  the  retells  of  preschool  children  with  HL  on  outcome  measures  of:    •  Language  Produc)vity:  Number  of  Total  Words  

(NTW)    &  Number  of  Different  Words  (NDW)  

•  Language  Complexity:    Mean  Length  of  U-erance  (MLU)  

Procedures  ² Narra've  models  were  adapted  from  The  Test  of  

Narra+ve  Retell  (TNR;  www.languagedynamicsgroup.com)  subtest  of  the  Narra+ve  Language  Measure  (NLM).        

 ² Each  of  the  four  narra've  models  was  read  to  

par'cipants  in  a  random  order  and  audio  recorded  to  transcribe  later.  

 

S)mulus  #3:    Balanced  Story,  No  Picture  Support        Examiner  says,  “I’m  going  to  tell  you  a  story.    Please  listen  carefully.    When  I  am  finished,  you  are  going  to  tell  me  the  same  story.    Are  you  ready?”      Rachel  was  holding  a  balloon  at  a  store  [S].  Her  mom  bought  it  because  she  had  been  good  at  the  store  [SU].  They  walked  outside  [S].  And  the  big  balloon  quickly  flew  up  in  the  sky  [C].  She  was  sad  because  her  balloon  floated  away  [SU].      Rachel  asked  her  mom  for  another  balloon  since  it  flew  away  [SU].  And  then  her  mom  bought  another  balloon  [C].  Rachel  held  onto  this  one  [S].  And  it  did  not  float  away  [C].      Examiner  says,  “Thanks  for  listening.    Now  you  tell  me  that  story.”    

² Language  complexity:    Mean  length  of  u-erance  (MLU)    

Note.  No  Picture  Support=  stories  were  told  auditorily.  Picture  Support=Stories  were  told  auditorily  with  a  colored  line  drawing  picture  provided  for  the  dura'on  of  the  story  and  retell.      

Table  1  Counterbalanced  Narra+ve  Re-­‐tell  Models      

² Narra've  re-­‐tells  may  be  more  sensi've  in  monitoring  gramma'cality  than  standardized  measures.  

 Language  Produc)vity  Measures  ² Balanced  stories  elicited  the  largest  language  produc'vity  measures.  ² Language  produc'vity  increased  with  picture  support.  

Language  Complexity  Measures  ² Balanced  stories  elicited  the  most  complex  u-erances.  ² Complexity  increased  with  without  picture  support.  

² Results  indicated  that  the  type  of  narra've  s'mulus  may  be  important  when  considering  expressive  output  of  preschoolers  with  hearing  loss.  

Table  6  Average  MLU  Between  Stories    

Figure  1.    Examiner  procedures  for  narra've  model.    Narra've  was  adapted  to  include  3  simple  u-erances,  3  coordinated  u-erances,  and  3  subordinated  u-erance.  [S]=  Simple  u-erance;  [SU]=  Subordinated  u-erance;  [C]=  Coordinated  u-erance.  

Figure  2.    Example  of  a  5  year  old  par'cipant  narra've  re-­‐tell  (S'mulus  3:  Balanced  with  No  Picture  Support).  Narra've  Analysis:    NTW  =  22;  NDW  =    17;  MLU  =    5.5;  Standardized  Measures:    EOWPVT  =  94;    ROWPVT  =  95;  CELF-­‐Recep've  =  100;  CELF-­‐Expressive  =  91,    Preschool  Language  Scale  (PLS)  =  85.    

+  [BeginStory3]  C  Rachel  hold  the  balloon.  C  And  it  quickly  float  away.  

C  And  she  asked  her  mom  get  another  balloon.  

C  And  it  didn’t  fly  away.  +  [BeginStory3]  

                             

² Language  Produc)vity  Measures:      Number  of  total  words  (NTW)  and  Number  of  different  words  (NDW)  

   

Table  4  Average  NDW  Between  Stories  

Num

ber  o

f  Differen

t    W

ords  

Table  2  Average  NTW  Between  Stories  

Table  5  NDW  Results  by  Time  

Table  3  NTW  Results  by  Time  

Table  7  MLU  Results  by  Time  

Num

ber  o

f  Total  W

ords  

0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  

Story  1                  S,  NP  

Story  2                S,  P  

Story  3                B,  NP  

Story  4                B,  P  

Mean  Length  U:eran

ce  

Num

ber  o

f  Differen

t  Words  

Num

ber  o

f  Total  W

ords  

0  

5  

10  

15  

20  

25  

Story  1                  S,  NP  

Story  2                S,  P  

Story  3                B,  NP  

Story  4                B,  P  

0  

5  

10  

15  

Story  1                  S,  NP  

Story  2                S,  P  

Story  3                B,  NP  

Story  4                B,  P   0  

5  10  15  20  25  30  35  

Time  1   Time  2   Time  3   Time  4  

P-­‐1  

P-­‐2  

P-­‐3  

P-­‐4  

P-­‐5  

P-­‐6  

P-­‐7  

P-­‐8  

P-­‐9  

P-­‐10  

P-­‐11  

P-­‐12  

P-­‐13  

0  10  20  30  40  50  60  70  

Time  1   Time  2   Time  3   Time  4  

P-­‐1  

P-­‐2  

P-­‐3  

P-­‐4  

P-­‐5  

P-­‐6  

P-­‐7  

P-­‐8  

P-­‐9  

P-­‐10  

P-­‐11  

P-­‐12  

P-­‐13  

0  

5  

10  

15  

20  

25  

Time  1   Time  2   Time  3   Time  4  

P-­‐1  

P-­‐2  

P-­‐3  

P-­‐4  

P-­‐5  

P-­‐6  

P-­‐7  

P-­‐8  

P-­‐9  

P-­‐10  

P-­‐11  

P-­‐12  

P-­‐13  Mean  Length  U:eran

ce  

² Language  Complexity  Measure:      Mean  length  of  u-erance  (MLU)  

Table  6  Average  of  MLU  Between  Stories