In recent years much interest has been focused on the manner in which the young child acquires language. Some researchers (Chomsky, 1965; McNeil) have postulated an inherent capacity to comprehend and utilize linguistic structures, while others such as Irwin, (1960), Hess and Shipman (1965), and Greenstein, et al, (1974) have focused on experiential determinants of language competence in early childhood. As with all children, the social and emotional behavior of deaf children is greatly influenced by their ability to communicate with significant others. Interactions between the normally developing child and his parents are characterized by mutual responsiveness, where each initiates and reciprocates communication. When a Child's language development is delayed or impaired(as with a hearing loss), this communication process may also become impaired, with parents being unable to respond appropriately to confused or reduced messages from the child. This paper reviews some of the pertinent research regarding the behavioral interaction between the parent and child and its effect on communication and psychosocial development. The implications of this data for the hearing-impaired child and his family are considered. It will address the question," What is it that parents with young hearing impaired children do that facilitates or impedes speech and language development?" A methodology is also presented for developing effective communication between such children and their parents.

Clinical audiologists at Utah State University have been using a master hearing aid as a basic part of hearing aid evaluation procedures . To ascertain the usefulness of the master hearing aid in predicting patient success with a wearable hearing aid , 20 subjects were given speech audiometric tests under the following conditions: (l) without amplification; (2) with the headset system of the master hearing aid (a system which utilizes chassis mounted microphones and external receivers of the type used with body-worn hearing aids); (3) with the ear-level system of the master hearing aid (a system which utilizes a microphone and receiver mounted in an ear-level hearing aid case); and (4) with a wearable ear-level hearing aid which had been previously selected for each subject on the basis of master hearing aid data. Using the ANOV procedure, statistically significant differences α=.05) were found between the mean speech reception thresholds obtained under the three aided test conditions, but differences were not clinically significant. The mean speech reception thresholds a greed within 4.0 dB. No significant difference was found between the mean speech discrimination scores obtained in quiet under the three aided test conditions. However, the mean speech discrimination score obtained in noise under the head set system condition was significantly poorer (α=.05) than the mean speech discrimination scores obtained under the ear-level system condition and also the wear able hearing aid condition. Differences as specified were 9.1 percent and 10.2 percent respectively. Conclusions were that the ear-level system of the master hearing aid and the headset system of the master hearing aid can be used to predict the SRT and speech discrimination score in quiet of hearing aid candidate using a wearable hearing aid, but that the ear-level system of the master hearing aid should be used exclusively when attempting to predict a patient's success with a wearable hearing aid on speech discrimination tasks in noise.

Assessment of language abilities is an integral part of accruing information on the development of concept formation and the learning of grammatical rules. The maturity and complexity of a child's language can be assessed through the use of a language sample. The sample consists of a specified number of utterances which are emitted spontaneously and then analyzed according to a given procedure. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant difference among the scores obtained from language samples of 25, 50, and 75 utterances when using the DSS procedure for ages 4.0 through 4.6 years. Twelve children, selected on the basis of chronological age, normal receptive vocabulary skills, normal hearing, and a monolingual background, participated as subjects.

Numerous linguistic studies have been done to substantiate the importance of prepositions in the English language. However, no normative studies have been done on the acquisition of expressing prepositions. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if there were demonstrable trends which would indicate a need for normative data on the acquisition of twenty-six prepositions tested on the Expressive Preposition Test (EPT). The study set out to determine at what age levels a given percentage of the prepositions were expressively acquired and if the socioeconomic status (SES) of the child’s family would be a determiner as to the age at which the child would expressively use prepositions. The EPT was administered to a total of thirty-six children between the ages of four and nine years. One-half of the children were from families of low SES and one-half were from families of high SES. The results show a high correlation between the age of the children and their ability to express prepositions. Each age group up through the eight-year-olds expressed a progressively higher percentage of the prepositions. A statement of positive correlation between intelligence-SES and EPT-SES was made in that those subjects in the high SES group scored higher on the intelligence quotient and EPT scores. Correlation coefficients indicate a slight correlation between the children’s intelligence quotient which ranged from 86-115 and their ability to express prepositions.

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the comparative effectiveness of two articulation carry-over techniques. It was hoped that through this comparison answers regarding carry-over results could be ascertained for purposes of aiding public school clinicians currently spending the majority of management time on carry-over. If one technique was found to be superior, its use among speech pathologists might aid in changing this time allocation trend.

The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) is a widely used receptive vocabulary screening tool, but it is not without its limitations, such as inadvisable I.Q. usage and a standardization procedure that lacks scope. A revision of the PPVT, known as the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R) was published in 1981, and contains a more complete standardization procedure as well as some structural changes of the test itself (Dunn, 1981). Speech/language pathology, whose diagnosticians most commonly use the age equivalent value, is a profession that would gain from information which deals with the equivalency of the PPVT-R to the original PPVT. The purpose of the study was to compare age equivalent values obtained from the PPVT and the PPVT-R for a preschool aged population. Specifically, this study sought to discover whether or not significant differences existed between the age equivalent values derived from the PPVT and the PPVT-R. Eighty children, age three years, six months to four years, six months participated as subjects in the study, selected on the basis of their chronological age and enrollment in one of ten selected preschools. The subjects were divided into four groups (N=20), and each group was administered one form of the PPVT (A or B) and one form of the PPVT-R ( L or M). The resultant groupings were: I (A and L); II (A and M); III ( B and L); and IV ( B and M).

The effectiveness of any language training program is determined by generalization of the clinically trained behaviors to spontaneous speech (Hedge, Noll and Pecora, 1979). Traditional language programs which employ operant procedures to establish the behavior in the clinic and reinforcement from family, teachers and peers in a variety of settings to obtain generalization, have been successful in establishing the use of grammatical rules in the clinic setting, but reportedly have failed to promote generalization (Rees, 1978). Recent literature in the areas of semantics and pragmatics has produced a trend toward teaching language in natural contexts. The purpose of this study was to investigate: 1) whether a group taught with a traditional syntax program would generalize the trained structure to spontaneous speech, 2) whether a group trained with a traditional syntax program in combination with nontraditional methods (natural context) would evidence generalization, 3) whether one of the above methods would evidence greater, lesser or the same generalization and 4) which method would take fewer, the same or greater number of sessions.

The purpose of this investigation was to replicate the study conducted by Lee and Canter (1971) and Lee (1974a) to determine if a significant difference among the scores in the two studies existed due to geographical location, and to initiate the establishment of norms for the Portland, Oregon geographical area. Forty children, selected on the basis of chronological age (4.0 to 4.11 years), normal receptive vocabulary skills, normal hearing, and a monolingual background, participated as subjects. A language sample of fifty utterances was elicited from each child and analyzed according to the Developmental Sentence Scoring (DSS) procedure.

The process of differentially diagnosing a child who is experiencing temporary normal disfluency from one who is beginning to stutter could be made objective by the establishment of normative data on fluency development. To date, there are no standardized norms on the development of fluency in children. Current investigations have contributed greatly to expectations of certain types and amounts of disfluencies in preschool-age children. Most of the research, however, has focused on observing children at discrete age levels from 2- to 7-years-of-age. Only one longitudinal study to date has been reported. Additional longitudinal data of preschoolaged children would benefit the establishment of normative data. Observing the same children over time helps to expose the subtleties that could be missed when looking only at specific age levels. The present study sought to contribute to the investigation of normal childhood disfluency by comparing various types and amounts of disf luencies in 44- to 49-month-old-children to the results of the same group of children when they were 30- to 35-months-of-age.

The purpose of this investigation was to determine if children labeled as “severe” functional articulation disordered, who had been enrolled in public school speech programs for one year or more, exhibited dyspraxic-like characteristics. Twenty individuals between the ages of 8 and 11 were chosen from the Gresham Public Schools, Lynch Public Schools, Portland Public Schools, Rockwood Public Schools and the Crippled Children’s Division, University of Oregon Medical School to serve as subjects for the three groups in this study. Eight subjects who comprised the experimental group were 11 severe11 functional articulation disorders and were selected from the public schools. Each misarticulated four or more phonemes, consistently or inconsistently, in isolation, syllables, words or conversation; each had made little or very slow progress according to his speech clinician and each had been enrolled in speech management for one year or more as a functional articulation case. Eight subjects in the normal control group were individuals selected from the public schools, with no speech or language problems. Each had never been enrolled in nor recommended for a speech intervention program. Four subjects in the dyspraxic control group were selected from the University of Oregon Medical School. Prior to the date of this investigation, each had been diagnosed as displaying developmental dyspraxia, dyspraxia of speech or verbal dyspraxia. The Modified Apraxia Battery (NAB) utilized in this investigation was a nonstandardized battery consisting of a verbal section and a nonverbal section. The verbal section was composed of ten subtests designed to delineate the presence of a dyspraxia of speech; the nonverbal section was composed of one subtest designed to delineate an oral apraxia and one subtest designed to delineate a limb apraxia. The results of this study revealed a highly significant difference in performance on the verbal section between the normal subjects and the “severe” functional articulation subjects with the normals performing better. A highly significant difference also was found between the normal subjects and the dyspraxic subjects with the normals performing better on the verbal section of the MAB. No significant difference was revealed, however, between the dyspraxics and the “severe” functional articulation cases. It was inferred, therefore, that these two groups performed in a similar manner because they exhibited similar verbal characteristics. “Severe” functional articulation disordered subjects were, therefore, found to exhibit verbal dyspraxic-like characteristics. No significant difference in performance was shown on the nonverbal section among the three groups. It appears the verbal section of the Modified Apraxia Battery much more effectively differentiates those displaying dyspraxic-like characteristics from those who do not than does the nonverbal section. Chi square analysis of items on the NAB supported this contention further suggesting subsection 3, Multisyllabic Words and subsection 6, Sentences are the most discriminating verbal items.