Social Communication Behaviours and Concurrent Child Language Abilities in Dyads with Children with Simple Phrase Speech
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research shows that children with ASD display less frequent social communication behaviours, like initiating and responding to their parent, and as a result, parents demonstrate a more directive communication style.These parent, child, and dyadic social communication behaviours are interdependent on each other and can have further effects on the child's concurrent and future expressive vocabulary.This study investigates the associations between social communication behaviours in parent-child dyads with children with autism and simple phrase speech and children's concurrent expressive vocabulary.The Dyadic Communication Measure for Autism (DCMA) was used to code for the presence of social communication behaviours in a parent-child play observation and the children's concurrent expressive vocabulary was measured with the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories (MCDI).Statistical analyses included multiple linear regressions to determine the relationships between parent, child, and dyadic social communication behaviours, and between these behaviours and children's expressive vocabulary.Results from 40 participating dyads indicated most had a suspected or confirmed ASD diagnosis with a child mean age of about 58 months and expressive vocabulary score within the 5 th to 10 th percentile.Findings showed that total parent and dyadic social communication behaviours positively predicted total child social communication behaviours, and that total parent and child social communication behaviours positively predicted dyadic social communication behaviours.Furthermore, parent, child, and dyadic social communication behaviours positively predicted expressive vocabulary.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".