非典型发展中的语言-认知界面:支持综合方法。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1159/000533685
Emily Stanford, Hélène Delage
{"title":"非典型发展中的语言-认知界面:支持综合方法。","authors":"Emily Stanford, Hélène Delage","doi":"10.1159/000533685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Links between the mastery of complex syntax and more general cognitive abilities (e.g., working memory [WM] and attention) are widely reported for both typically developing children and children with atypical language development, such as developmental language disorder (DLD). These observations have resulted in debates about whether the locus of breakdown in populations with known syntactic impairment is situated in a specific language system or a more general cognitive system. Recently, a hybrid model of language acquisition, the parallel combination approach (PCA), in which both domain-specific and domain-general processes contribute to language development, was put forward.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Our review, which is the first to examine the validity of the PCA, compares a body of our own work investigating the language-cognition interface in various populations: children with specific learning difficulties, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and DLD. We report findings from two cross-sectional studies (studies 1 and 2), one priming study (study 3), and two training studies (studies 4 and 5). The results confirm a close link between WM, attention, and syntax, in line with domain-general approaches to language impairment. However, certain findings within this review also reveal that impaired general skills can be found alongside intact syntax, providing support for domain-specific approaches. While these results may initially appear contradictory, we argue that they are perfectly in line with the predictions made by the PCA.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>Study 1 confirms that clinicians should assess syntax in children with specific learning difficulties to avoid the missed diagnosis of comorbid DLD. Studies 2 and 3 offer perspectives on the differential diagnosis of ADHD and DLD and highlight the advantages of using probe tests and dynamic assessment when evaluating children with suspected syntactic impairment. Studies 4 and 5 describe a novel, empirically validated WM training program that has been shown to lead to syntactic improvements in clinical markers of DLD. Finally, the PCA is also clinically relevant as it underscores that children with the same diagnostic label can present dissimilar cognitive profiles with different sources of breakdown. Collectively, the various studies highlight the intricacy of the relationship between syntax and cognition, which cannot be easily described by traditional single-disciplinary frameworks.</p>","PeriodicalId":12114,"journal":{"name":"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica","volume":" ","pages":"309-320"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Language-Cognition Interface in Atypical Development: Support for an Integrative Approach.\",\"authors\":\"Emily Stanford, Hélène Delage\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000533685\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Links between the mastery of complex syntax and more general cognitive abilities (e.g., working memory [WM] and attention) are widely reported for both typically developing children and children with atypical language development, such as developmental language disorder (DLD). These observations have resulted in debates about whether the locus of breakdown in populations with known syntactic impairment is situated in a specific language system or a more general cognitive system. Recently, a hybrid model of language acquisition, the parallel combination approach (PCA), in which both domain-specific and domain-general processes contribute to language development, was put forward.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Our review, which is the first to examine the validity of the PCA, compares a body of our own work investigating the language-cognition interface in various populations: children with specific learning difficulties, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and DLD. We report findings from two cross-sectional studies (studies 1 and 2), one priming study (study 3), and two training studies (studies 4 and 5). The results confirm a close link between WM, attention, and syntax, in line with domain-general approaches to language impairment. However, certain findings within this review also reveal that impaired general skills can be found alongside intact syntax, providing support for domain-specific approaches. While these results may initially appear contradictory, we argue that they are perfectly in line with the predictions made by the PCA.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>Study 1 confirms that clinicians should assess syntax in children with specific learning difficulties to avoid the missed diagnosis of comorbid DLD. Studies 2 and 3 offer perspectives on the differential diagnosis of ADHD and DLD and highlight the advantages of using probe tests and dynamic assessment when evaluating children with suspected syntactic impairment. Studies 4 and 5 describe a novel, empirically validated WM training program that has been shown to lead to syntactic improvements in clinical markers of DLD. Finally, the PCA is also clinically relevant as it underscores that children with the same diagnostic label can present dissimilar cognitive profiles with different sources of breakdown. Collectively, the various studies highlight the intricacy of the relationship between syntax and cognition, which cannot be easily described by traditional single-disciplinary frameworks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12114,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"309-320\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000533685\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000533685","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:无论是发育正常的儿童还是发育性语言障碍(DLD)等语言发育不典型的儿童,复杂句法的掌握与更一般的认知能力(如工作记忆[WM]和注意力)之间的联系都被广泛报道。这些观察结果引发了一场争论,即已知句法障碍人群中的障碍发生在特定的语言系统中,还是在更广泛的认知系统中。最近,一种语言习得的混合模型--平行组合方法(PCA)--被提出来,在这种模型中,特定领域和一般领域的过程都有助于语言的发展。摘要:我们的综述是第一篇研究 PCA 有效性的文章,它比较了我们自己在不同人群中研究语言-认知界面的大量工作:有特殊学习困难的儿童、注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)和发育迟缓性语言障碍。我们报告了两项横断面研究(研究 1 和研究 2)、一项引物研究(研究 3)和两项训练研究(研究 4 和研究 5)的结果。研究结果证实,WM、注意力和句法之间存在密切联系,这与研究语言障碍的通用领域方法是一致的。然而,本综述中的某些发现也揭示出,在语法完好的同时,一般技能也会受损,这为特定领域方法提供了支持。虽然这些结果最初看起来可能相互矛盾,但我们认为它们完全符合 PCA 的预测:研究 1 证实,临床医生应该对有特殊学习困难的儿童进行句法评估,以避免漏诊合并 DLD。研究 2 和研究 3 为多动症和 DLD 的鉴别诊断提供了视角,并强调了在评估疑似句法障碍儿童时使用探针测试和动态评估的优势。研究 4 和研究 5 描述了一种新颖的、经过经验验证的 WM 训练计划,该计划已被证明能够改善 DLD 临床标记物的句法。最后,PCA 也具有临床相关性,因为它强调了具有相同诊断标签的儿童可能表现出不同的认知特征,而这些特征又具有不同的缺陷来源。总之,这些研究突出了句法与认知之间错综复杂的关系,而传统的单一学科框架无法轻松描述这种关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Language-Cognition Interface in Atypical Development: Support for an Integrative Approach.

Background: Links between the mastery of complex syntax and more general cognitive abilities (e.g., working memory [WM] and attention) are widely reported for both typically developing children and children with atypical language development, such as developmental language disorder (DLD). These observations have resulted in debates about whether the locus of breakdown in populations with known syntactic impairment is situated in a specific language system or a more general cognitive system. Recently, a hybrid model of language acquisition, the parallel combination approach (PCA), in which both domain-specific and domain-general processes contribute to language development, was put forward.

Summary: Our review, which is the first to examine the validity of the PCA, compares a body of our own work investigating the language-cognition interface in various populations: children with specific learning difficulties, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and DLD. We report findings from two cross-sectional studies (studies 1 and 2), one priming study (study 3), and two training studies (studies 4 and 5). The results confirm a close link between WM, attention, and syntax, in line with domain-general approaches to language impairment. However, certain findings within this review also reveal that impaired general skills can be found alongside intact syntax, providing support for domain-specific approaches. While these results may initially appear contradictory, we argue that they are perfectly in line with the predictions made by the PCA.

Key messages: Study 1 confirms that clinicians should assess syntax in children with specific learning difficulties to avoid the missed diagnosis of comorbid DLD. Studies 2 and 3 offer perspectives on the differential diagnosis of ADHD and DLD and highlight the advantages of using probe tests and dynamic assessment when evaluating children with suspected syntactic impairment. Studies 4 and 5 describe a novel, empirically validated WM training program that has been shown to lead to syntactic improvements in clinical markers of DLD. Finally, the PCA is also clinically relevant as it underscores that children with the same diagnostic label can present dissimilar cognitive profiles with different sources of breakdown. Collectively, the various studies highlight the intricacy of the relationship between syntax and cognition, which cannot be easily described by traditional single-disciplinary frameworks.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica
Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Published since 1947, ''Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica'' provides a forum for international research on the anatomy, physiology, and pathology of structures of the speech, language, and hearing mechanisms. Original papers published in this journal report new findings on basic function, assessment, management, and test development in communication sciences and disorders, as well as experiments designed to test specific theories of speech, language, and hearing function. Review papers of high quality are also welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Effects of Puree Type and Color on Ratings of Pharyngeal Residue, Penetration, and Aspiration during FEES: A Prospective Study of 37 Dysphagic Outpatient Adults. Within- and cross-language generalization in narrative production of bilingual persons with aphasia following Semantic Feature Analysis therapy. Preliminary Investigation of Context-Aware AAC with Automated Just-in-Time Cloze Phrase Response Options for Social Participation from Children on the Autism Spectrum. The Relationship between Traditional Acoustic Measures and Cepstral Analysis of Voice. Cross-Linguistic Nasalance Comparisons: A Review of Speech Sample Sets and Preliminary Consideration of Effect of Lexical Tone.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1