Use and Acquisition of Communicative Functions and Communicative Forms by Portuguese European Toddlers with and without Hearing Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify and compare communicative functions and forms in toddlers without (age group 8 to 18 months) and with hearing impairment (age group 13 to 18 months).Methods: Participants were 37 toddlers with normal hearing, 4 toddlers with hearing impairment.Results: The results indicate an increase in the average of the communicative functions conveyed along the increase of the age groups. There is an association between the age group and the type of communicative functions taught. Although there is no relationship between the hearing impairment condition and the average use of communicative functions, the two groups make different use of the type of communicative functions as well as the communicative forms.Conclusion: Is of paramount importance to understand the relationships between communicative forms and communicative functions in the assessment and intervention of communication skills in toddlers. In the case of toddlers with hearing impairment is fundamental to be aware that is not the frequency but the type of communication skills that they establish with their interlocutors.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".