Effects of speech perception, vocabulary, and articulation skills on morphology and syntax in children with speech sound disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although it has been shown that some children with Speech Sound Disorders (SSD) have difficulties in the area of productive morphosyntax, there has been little investigation into the possible source of these problems. Such research may nevertheless shed some light on theoretical questions of morphosyntactic abilities in children with atypical speech and/or language development, as well as suggest avenues for remediation of language weaknesses. The current study examined possible effects of speech perception, vocabulary, and articulation skills on concurrent syntax and longitudinal morphology in a group of seventy-nine children with SSD. Structural Equation Modelling techniques were used to model the relationships among the variables. The rationales for the models were drawn from the literature on children with SSD and also from studies of children with Specific Language Impairment (SLI). The latter were paid particular attention, as some children with SSD may also have SLI, and as morphosyntactic skills in individuals with SLI have been rigorously investigated. It was found that, of the three models examined, an articulation model, in which links were posited from articulation to syntax and from articulation to morphology, demonstrated good fit. Although some of the limitations in morphology and syntax seen in these children could be accounted for in terms of frank articulation errors, other explanations for the association between articulation and morphosyntax were also considered. One possibility was that speech motor skills and morphosyntax were dependent on similar neural substrates that may have been impaired in some of the participants investigated. A second possibility was that, given a finite set of resources devoted to language production, laboured articulation in the children with SSD bled resources from other areas of speech/language processing, and from expressive morphosyntax in particular. Further research, especially studies examining pos
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".