metricas
covid
Buscar en
Revista de Logopedia, Foniatría y Audiología
Toda la web
Inicio Revista de Logopedia, Foniatría y Audiología Elicited vs. spontaneous language as methods for the assessment of grammatical d...
Journal Information
Vol. 41. Issue 4.
Pages 164-171 (October - December 2021)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Visits
107
Vol. 41. Issue 4.
Pages 164-171 (October - December 2021)
Original article
Elicited vs. spontaneous language as methods for the assessment of grammatical development: The DEME assessment tool
Lenguaje elicitatdo vs. lenguaje espontáneo como métodos de evaluación del desarollo gramatical: la prueba de evaluación DEME
Visits
107
Anny Castilla-Earlsa,
Corresponding author
annycastilla@uh.edu

Corresponding author.
, Ana Teresa Pérez-Lerouxb, Alejandra Auzac
a Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, 4455 Cullen Blvd, Room 100, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204, United States
b Department of Linguistics and Spanish, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
c Hospital General Dr. Manuel Gea González, Mexico City, Distrito Federal, Mexico
This item has received
Article information
Abstract
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Figures (2)
Tables (4)
Table 1. Descriptive statistics.
Table 2. Distribution of children who made broad errors by group.
Table 3. Distribution of children who made article errors by group.
Table 4. Descriptive information for Article Errors.
Show moreShow less
Abstract
Introduction and objectives

This study compares data collection approaches in the assessment of grammatical development in Spanish-speaking children. Specifically, we compared error rates produced in data collected using samples from spontaneous language versus elicited production, using both broad (overall) and narrow measures (errors with noun phrases).

Methods and participants

Monolingual-Spanish-speaking five-year-olds (n=55) were divided into typical language development (TL) and at-risk (Risk) according to a preexisting test, Tamiz de Problemas del Lenguaje. All children completed an elicited production and a narrative task.

Results

Children in the TL group outperform children in the Risk group in all measures used in this study. Statistically significant differences were found between children at Risk and TL children in both spontaneous and elicited language measures, although the effect size of the elicited language measures was considerably higher. Elicited and spontaneous tasks are more likely to produce results that are in accord than in disaccord. However, when results are in disaccord, the results almost always show low performance in elicited language but high performance in spontaneous language. Elicitation methods do not seem to have an impact on the type of error produced for neither narrow nor broad measures.

Keywords:
Assessment
Spontaneous language
Elicited language
Grammar
Resumen
Introducción y objetivos

Este estudio compara los enfoques de recolección de datos para la evaluación del desarrollo gramatical en niños que hablan español. Específicamente, comparamos las tasas de error producidas usando muestras de lenguaje espontáneo versus la producción elicitada, usando medidas generales (todos los errores) y específicas (errores con frases nominales).

Métodos y participantes

Los niños monolingües de cinco años de habla hispana (n=55) se dividieron en dos grupos: desarrollo del lenguaje típico o a riesgo de desórdenes del lenguaje, para lo cual se usó el Tamiz de Problemas del Lenguaje. Todos los niños completaron una producción del lenguaje elicitada y una tarea narrativa.

Resultados

Los niños del grupo típico superan a los niños del grupo a riesgo en todas las medidas utilizadas en este estudio. Se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los niños a riesgo y los niños típicos en las medidas de lenguaje espontáneo y elicitado, aunque el tamaño del efecto de las medidas de lenguaje elicitado fue considerablemente mayor. El lenguaje elicitado y espontáneo producen mas resultados que están de acuerdo que en desacuerdo; sin embargo, cuando los resultados están en desacuerdo, casi siempre muestran un bajo rendimiento en el lenguaje elicitado pero un alto rendimiento en el lenguaje espontáneo. Los métodos de obtención no parecen tener un impacto en el tipo de error producido ni para medidas específicas ni amplias.

Palabras clave:
Evaluación
Lenguaje espontáneo
Lenguaje elicitado
Grámatica

Article

These are the options to access the full texts of the publication Revista de Logopedia, Foniatría y Audiología
Subscriber
Subscriber

If you already have your login data, please click here .

If you have forgotten your password you can you can recover it by clicking here and selecting the option “I have forgotten my password”
Subscribe
Subscribe to

Revista de Logopedia, Foniatría y Audiología

Purchase
Purchase article

Purchasing article the PDF version will be downloaded

Price 19.34 €

Purchase now
Contact
Phone for subscriptions and reporting of errors
From Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. (GMT + 1) except for the months of July and August which will be from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Calls from Spain
932 415 960
Calls from outside Spain
+34 932 415 960
E-mail
Article options
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos