Comparing the lexicon of children with Down syndrome and typically developing the same mental age
Comparação do léxico de crianças com Síndrome de Down e com desenvolvimento típico de mesma idade mental
Amanda Tragueta Ferreira; Dionísia Aparecida Cusin Lamônica
Abstract
Purpose: to check the lexical, receptive and expressive performance, of children with DS and compare it with the lexical performance of typically developing children matched for gender and mental age.
Method: the study included 40 children, 20 with Down syndrome (experimental group – EG), of both genders, with age varying between 36 and 71 months and 20 typically developing children (control group – CG), matched according to gender and mental age (psychological assessment with the New Version of the Stanford-Binet method, adapted by Terman and Merrill) with EG. After the guardians have signed the consent paper, they responded to an interview protocol containing information about the previous life of the subject. The evaluation was made by applying Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT), which assesses receptive vocabulary, and Child Language Test ABFW – Vocabulary Part B, which assesses expressive vocabulary.
Results: subjects in the EG had underperformed in the GC in the PPVT and in verbal description usual in ABFW, with significant statistical differences. There was a correlation between performance on receptive and expressive vocabulary of both groups.
Conclusion: it was found that the lexical, receptive and expressive performance, in children with DS is lower than in typically developing children, even when matched as for mental age.
Keywords
Resumo
Objetivo: verificar o desempenho lexical, receptivo e expressivo, de crianças com Síndrome de Down e comparar com o desempenho lexical de crianças com desenvolvimento típico pareados por sexo e idade mental.
Método: participaram do estudo 40 crianças, 20 com síndrome de Down (grupo experimental – GE), de ambos os sexos, com idade cronológica variando entre 36 e 71 meses e 20 crianças com desenvolvimento típico (grupo controle – GC) pareadas quanto ao sexo e idade mental (avaliação psicológica com o instrumento Nova Versão do Método Stanford-Binet, adaptado por Terman e Merril) com o GE. Após a assinatura do Termo de Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido pelos responsáveis legais, estes responderam um protocolo de anamnese, contendo informações sobre a vida pregressa do participante. A avaliação foi composta pela aplicação do Teste de Vocabulário por Imagens Peabody (TVIP), que avalia vocabulário receptivo, e do Teste de Linguagem Infantil ABFW – Vocabulário Parte B, que avalia vocabulário expressivo.
Resultados: os participantes do GE apresentaram desempenho inferior ao GC no TVIP e na designação verbal usual do ABFW, com diferenças estatisticamente significantes. Verificou-se correlação entre o desempenho no vocabulário receptivo e expressivo de ambos os grupos.
Conclusão: verificou-se que o desempenho lexical, receptivo e expressivo, das crianças com SD é inferior ao de crianças com desenvolvimento típico, mesmo quando pareadas pela idade mental.
Palavras-chave
Referencias
1. Yoder PJ, Warren SF. Early predictors of language in children with and without Down syndrome. Am J Ment Retardat. 2004;109(4):285-300.
2. Määttä T, Tervo-Määttä T, Taanila A; Kaski M, Livanainen M. Mental health, behaviour and intellectual abilities of people with Down syndrome. Down Synd Res and Pract. 2006;11(1):37-43.
3. Vicari S. Motor development and neuropsychological patterns in persons with Down syndrome. Behav Genetic. 2006;36(3):355-64.
4. Stefanini S, Caselli MC, Volterra V. Spoken and gestual production in a naming task by young children with Down syndrome. Brain Lang. 2007;101(3):208-21.
5. Caselli MC, Monaco L, Trasciani M, Vicari S. Language in Italian Children with Down syndrome and with Specific Language Impairment. Am Psychol Assoc. 2008;22(1):27-35.
6. Adamson LB, Bakeman RE, Deckner DF, Romski MA. Joint Engagement and the Emergence of Language in Children with Autism and Down syndrome. J Autism Dev Disord. 2009;39:84-96.
7. Rihtman T, Tekuzener E, Tenenbaum A, Bachrach S, Ornoy A. Are the cognitive functions of children with Down syndrome related to their participation? Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010;52(1):72-8.
8. Tsao R, Kindelberger C. Variability of cognitive development in children with Down syndrome: Relevance of good reasons for using the cluster procedure. Res Dev Disabil. 2009;30:426-32.
9. Hick RF, Botting N, Conti-Ramsden G. Short-term memory and vocabulary development in children with Down syndrome and children with specific language impairment. Develop Med & Child Neurol. 2005;47:532-8.
10. Chapman RS. Language learning in Down syndrome: the speech and language profile compared to adolescents with cognitive impairment of unknown origin. Downs Syndr Res and Pract. 2006;10(2):61-6.
11. Jarrold C, Baddeley AD, Phillips C. Long-term memory for verbal and visual information in Down syndrome and Williams syndrome: performance on the Doors and People test. Cortex. 2007;43(2):233-47.
12. Roberts J, Price J, Barnes E, Nelson L, Burchinal M, Hennon EA, Moskowitz L, Edwards A, Malkin C, Anderson K, Misenheimer J, Hooper SR. Receptive vocabulary, expressive vocabulary, and speech production of boys with Fragile X syndrome in comparison to boys with Down syndrome. Am J Ment Retard. 2007;112(3):177-93.
13. Price JR, Roberts JE, Hennon EA, Berni MC, Anderson KL, Sideris J. Syntatic Complexity during conversation of boys with Fragile X syndrome and Down syndrome. J Speech, Lang, Hear Res. 2008;51:3-15.
14. Ypsilanti A, Grouios G. Linguistic Profile of individuals with Down Syndrome: Comparing the linguistic performance of three developmental disorders. Child Neuropsychol. 2008;14(1):148-70.
15. Jarrold C, Thorn AS, Stephens E. The relationships among verbal short-term memory, phonological awareness, and new word learning: evidence from typical development and Down syndrome. J Exp child Psychol. 2009;102(2):196-218.
16. Zampini L, D'odorico. Communicative gestures and vocabulary development in 36-month-old children with Down's syndrome. Int J Lang Comm Dis. 2009;44(6):1063-73.
17. Spanò M, Mercuri E, Randoá T, Pantoá T, Gagliano A, Henderson S, Guzzetta F. Motor and perceptual-motor competence in children with Down syndrome: variation in performance with age. Europ J of Paed Neurol. 1999;3:7-14.
18. Galeote M, Soto P, Checa E, Gómez A, Lamela E. The acquisition of productive vocabulary in Spanish children with Down syndrome. J Int Dev Dis. 2008;33(4):292-302.
19. Martin GE, Klusek J, Estigarribia B, Roberts JE. Language characteristics of individuals whith Down Syndrome. Top Lang Disorders. 2009;29(2):112-32.
20. Campos AC, Rocha NACF, Savelsbergh GJP. Development of reaching and grasping skills in infants with Down syndrome. Res Dev Disabil. 2010;31:70-80.
21. Caselli MC, Vicari S, Longobardi E, Lami L, Pizolli C, Stella G. Gesture and words in early development of children with Down syndrome. Am Speech, Lang, Hear Assoc. 1998;41:1125-35.
22. Alony S, Kozulin A. Dynamic assessment of receptive language in children with Down syndrome. Adv in Speech, Lang Pathology. 2007;9(4):323-31.
23. Flabiano FC. A constituição da representação pela criança com síndrome de Down [tese]. São Paulo: Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo; 2010.
24. Facon B, Grubar JC, Gardez C. Chronological age and receptive vocabulary of persons with Down syndrome. Psychol Reports. 1998;82:723-6.
25. Dunn LM, Padilla ER, Lugo DE. Teste de Vocabulário em Imagens Peabody (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test), adaptação Hispano-americana. Espanha: Circle Pines: American Guidance Service; 1986.
26. Béfi-Lopes DM. Vocabulário (Parte B). In: Andrade CRF, Béfi-Lopes DM, Fernandes FDM, Wertzner HF. ABFW – Teste de linguagem infantil: nas áreas de fonologia, vocabulário, fluência e pragmática. Carapicuíba, São Paulo: Pró-Fono, Cap. 2, 2000.
27. Groen MA, Yasin I, Laws G, Barry JG, Bishop DVM. Weak hand preference in children with Down syndrome is associated with language deficits. Dev Psycholbiol. 2008;50:242-50.
Submitted date:
27/10/2010
Accepted date:
10/01/2011
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email