Reliability, validity and developmental sensitivity of the Language Use Inventory (LUI) in the Chinese context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pragmatics has generally been defined as the ability to use language in social situations, it is commonly regarded as the third major component of language ability. To date, there is no tool for assessing early pragmatic development of Chinese-speaking children. AIMS: To describe the translation of the Language Use Inventory (LUI) from English to Mandarin Chinese and to report findings on the Chinese version's reliability, validity and developmental sensitivity. METHODS & PROCEDURES: The original English version of the LUI was translated into Mandarin Chinese. Parents of 177 typically developing (TD) toddlers and preschool children completed the inventory to examine its internal reliability and construct validity and how scores differed across ages and sexes. A total of 31 parents out of the 177 completed the LUI-Mandarin, again within 4 weeks, to assess test-retest reliability. To examine discriminative validity, 43 parents of age- and sex-matched TD children and children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) recruited from Nanjing Brain Hospital affiliated with Nanjing Medical University completed the LUI-Mandarin. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha values for the LUI-Mandarin's three parts and for 11 of 12 LUI-Mandarin subscales were 0.707-0.992, with most values in the 0.825-0.992 range. Test-retest reliability ranged from 0.66 to 0.95, indicating good to excellent reliability. Factor analysis of the LUI-Mandarin revealed two different factors, and the total variance explained was 74.38%. The LUI-Mandarin total scores and subscale scores increased with age for both boys and girls, providing evidence of the inventory's developmental sensitivity. Girls, however, had higher total scores than boys at earlier ages (18-23 months). The results of the discriminant validity study revealed that performance was significantly lower in the ASD group than in the TD group with respect to LUI total scores and subscale scores (except for subscale A). CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The LUI-Mandarin is the first and only questionnaire available in China that evaluates the pragmatic language skills of children aged between 18 and 47 months. The results of the study show that the LUI-Mandarin is a valid and reliable tool for Chinese toddlers and preschool children. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject The LUI is a parent-report questionnaire that can provide comprehensive information about very young children's communicative competence. It is widely used both for assessment and to guide intervention. Additionally, it has been translated into French, Italian, Polish, Arabic, Portuguese and Norwegian and it shows good reliability and validity. What this paper adds to existing knowledge In the present study we describe the translation of the LUI from English to Mandarin Chinese and report findings on the Chinese version's reliability, validity and developmental sensitivity. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The LUI-Mandarin is the first and only questionnaire available in China that can evaluate pragmatic language skills of children aged between 18 and 47 months. The results show that the LUI-Mandarin is a valid and reliable tool for use with Chinese toddlers and preschool children.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".