Early Vocabulary Profiles of Young Deaf Children Who Use Cochlear Implants.

Purpose: This study examined vocabulary profiles in young cochlear implant (CI) recipients and in children with normal hearing (NH) matched on receptive vocabulary size to improve our understanding of young CI recipients’ acquisition of word categories (e.g., common nouns or closed-class words). Met...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research Vol. 63; no. 4; pp. 1254 - 1270
Autores principales: Jongmin Jung, Reed, Jessa, Wagner, Laura, Stephens, Julie, Warner-Czyz, Andrea D., Uhler, Kristin, Houstona, Derek
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Apr2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=142935600&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 142935600
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        10924388
        1SM
      jtl: Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research
      issn: 10924388
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Apr2020
      vid: 63
      iid: 4
      pid: 42
      pub: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
    artinfo:
      ui:
        142935600
        10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00315
      ppf: 1254
      ppct: 16
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 940KB
      tig:
        atl: Early Vocabulary Profiles of Young Deaf Children Who Use Cochlear Implants.
      aug:
        au:
          Jongmin Jung
          Reed, Jessa
          Wagner, Laura
          Stephens, Julie
          Warner-Czyz, Andrea D.
          Uhler, Kristin
          Houstona, Derek
        affil:
          Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus.
          Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
          Center for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
          School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences, The University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson.
          Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Otolaryngology, and Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine.
          Children’s Hospital Colorado, Aurora.
      su:
        Deaf children
        Language acquisition
        Vocabulary
        Retrospective studies
        Cochlear implants
        Phonological awareness
      sug:
        subj:
          Deaf children
          Language acquisition
          Vocabulary
          Retrospective studies
          Cochlear implants
          Phonological awareness
      ab: Purpose: This study examined vocabulary profiles in young cochlear implant (CI) recipients and in children with normal hearing (NH) matched on receptive vocabulary size to improve our understanding of young CI recipients’ acquisition of word categories (e.g., common nouns or closed-class words). Method: We compared receptive and expressive vocabulary profiles between young CI recipients (n = 48; mean age at activation = 15.61 months, SD = 4.20) and children with NH (n = 48). The two groups were matched on receptive vocabulary size as measured by the MacArthur–Bates Communicative Development Inventories (Fenson et al., 2006): Words and Gestures form. The CI group had, on average, 8.98 months of hearing experience. The mean chronological age at completing the MacArthur–Bates Communicative Development Inventories was 23.99 months (SD = 5.14) for the CI group and 13.72 months (SD = 1.50) for the NH group. Results: The CI group had a larger expressive vocabulary size than the receptive vocabulary size–matched NH group. The larger expressive vocabulary size was associated with the group difference in social words but not with common nouns. The analyses for predicate words and closed-class words included only children who produced the target categories. The CI group had a larger proportion of predicate words than the NH group, but no difference was found in closed-class words in expressive vocabulary. Conclusions: Differences found in expressive vocabulary profiles may be affected by spoken vocabulary size and their age. A further examination is warranted using language samples to understand the effect of language input on children’s vocabulary profiles.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N