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