ASHAWire
Advanced search
Skip main navigation
No AccessJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing ResearchResearch Article15 Apr 2019

Retrieval-Based Word Learning in Young Typically Developing Children and Children With Development Language Disorder II: A Comparison of Retrieval Schedules

    https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-18-0071

    Abstract

    Purpose

    Retrieval practice has been found to be a powerful strategy to enhance long-term retention of new information; however, the utility of retrieval practice when teaching young children new words is largely unknown, and even less is known for young children with language impairments. The current study examined the effect of 2 different retrieval schedules on word learning at both the behavioral and neural levels.

    Method

    Participants included 16 typically developing children (MTD = 61.58 months) and 16 children with developmental language disorder (MDLD = 59.60 months). Children participated in novel word learning sessions in which the spacing of retrieval practice was manipulated: Some words were retrieved only after other words had been presented (i.e., repeated retrieval that required contextual reinstatement [RRCR]); others were taught using an immediate retrieval schedule. In Experiment 1, children's recall of the novel word labels and their meanings was tested after a 5-min delay and a 1-week delay. In Experiment 2, event-related brain potentials were obtained from a match–mismatch task utilizing the novel word stimuli.

    Results

    Experiment 1 findings revealed that children were able to label referents and to retain the novel words more successfully if the words were taught in the RRCR learning condition. Experiment 2 findings revealed that mismatching picture–word pairings elicited a robust N400 event-related brain potential only for words that were taught in the RRCR condition. In addition, children were more accurate in identifying picture–word matches and mismatches for words taught in the RRCR condition, relative to the immediate retrieval condition.

    Conclusions

    Retrieval practice that requires contextual reinstatement through spacing results in enhanced word learning and long-term retention of words. Both typically developing children and children with developmental language disorder benefit from this type of retrieval procedure.

    Supplemental Material

    https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.7927112

    References

    • Alt, M., Meyers, C., Oglivie, T., Nicholas, K., & Arizmendi, G. (2014). Cross-situational statistically based word learning intervention for late-talking toddlers.Journal of Communication Disorders, 52, 207–220.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Alt, M., & Plante, E. (2006). Factors that influence lexical and semantic fast mapping language impairment.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 941–955.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1997). Guidelines for audiologic screening. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/policy
      Google Scholar
    • Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4.Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Batterink, L., & Neville, H. (2011). Implicit and explicit mechanisms of word learning in a narrative context: An event-related potential study.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 3181–3196.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Besson, M., Kutas, M., & Petten, C. V. (1992). An event-related potential (ERP) analysis of semantic congruity and repetition effects in sentences.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 132–149.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Bjork, R. A. (1988). Retrieval practice and the maintenance of knowledge.Practical Aspects of Memory: Current Research and Issues, Vol. 1: Memory in Everyday Life, 1, 396–401.
      Google Scholar
    • Boersma, M., & Weenink, D. (2006). PRAAT: Doing phonetics by computer. the Netherlands: University of Amsterdam. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org
      Google Scholar
    • Catts, H. W., Fey, M. E., Tomblin, J. B., & Zhang, X. (2002). A longitudinal investigation of reading outcomes in children with language impairments.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 1142–1157.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Rohrer, D., & Wixted, J. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative syntesis.Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354–380.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Dawson, J., Stout, C., Eyer, J. A., Tattersall, P., Fonkalsrud, J., & Croley, K. (2005). Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–Preschool 2. DeKalb, IL: Janelle.
      Google Scholar
    • Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, D. M. (2007). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test–Fourth Edition (PPVT-4). Bloomington, MN: NCS Pearson.
      Google Scholar
    • Edwards, J., Beckman, M. E., & Munson, B. (2004). Vocabulary size and phonotactic production accuracy and fluency in nonword repetition.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 421–436.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Ellis, E. M., Borovsky, A., Elman, J. L., & Evans, J. L. (2015). Novel word learning: An eye-tracking study. Are 18-month-old late talkers really different from their typical peers.Journal of Communication Disorders, 58, 143–157.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (2001). Meaning and modality: Influences of context, semantic memory organization, and perceptual predictability on picture processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 202–224.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Friedrich, M., & Friederici, A. D. (2005). Lexical priming and semantic integration reflected in the event-related potential of 14-month-olds.Neuroreport, 16, 653–656.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Fritz, C. O., Morris, P. E., Nolan, D., & Singleton, J. (2007). Expanding retrieval practice: An effective aid to preschool children's learning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 991–1004.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Gertner, B. L., Rice, M. L., & Hadley, P. A. (1994). Influence of communicative competence on peer preferences in a preschool classroom.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 913–923.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Goossens, N. A. M. C., Camp, G., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Tabbers, H. K., & Zwaan, R. A. (2014). The benefit of retrieval practice over elaborative restudy in primary school vocabulary learning.Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, 177–182.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Gray, S. (2004). Word learning by preschoolers with specific language impairment: Predictors and poor learners.Journal of Speech, Language, & Hearing Research, 47, 1117–1132.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Greenslade, K. J., Plante, E., & Vance, R. (2009). The diagnostic accuracy and construct validity of the Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–Preschool 2.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 150–160.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Grier, J. B. (1971). Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: Computing formulas.Psychological Bulletin, 75, 424–429.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Haebig, E., Leonard, L. B., Usler, E., Deevy, P., & Weber, C. (2018). An initial investigation of the neural correlates of word processing in preschoolers with specific language impairment.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 61, 729–739.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Haebig, E., Saffran, J. R., & Ellis Weismer, S. (2017). Statistical word learning in children with autism spectrum disorder and specific language impairment.The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58, 1251–1263.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Hahne, A., Eckstein, K., & Friederici, A. D. (2004). Brain signatures of syntactic and semantic processes during children's language development.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 1302–1318.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Hall, W. S., Nagy, W. E., & Linn, R. L. (1984). Spoken words, effects of situation and social group on oral word usage and frequency. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
      Google Scholar
    • Heisler, L., Goffman, L., & Younger, B. (2010). Lexical and articulatory interactions in children's language production.Developmental Science, 13, 722–730.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Holcomb, P. J., Coffey, S. A., & Neville, H. J. (1992). Visual and auditory sentence processing: A developmental analysis using event-related brain potentials.Developmental Neuropsychology, 8, 203–241.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Juottonen, K., Revonsuo, A., & Lang, H. (1996). Dissimilar age influences on two ERP waveforms (LPC and N400) reflecting semantic context effect.Cognitive Brain Research, 4, 99–107.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Jurcak, V., Tsuzuki, D., & Dan, I. (2007). 10/20, 10/10, and 10/5 systems revisited: Their validity as relative head-surface-based positioning systems.NeuroImage, 34, 1600–1611.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Justice, L. M., Meier, J., & Walpole, S. (2005). Learning new words from storybooks: An efficacy study with at-risk kindergartners.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36, 17–32.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Kail, R. V., Hale, C. A., Leonard, L. B., & Nippold, M. A. (1984). Lexical storage and retrieval in language-impaired children.Applied Psycholinguistics, 5, 37–49.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Kail, R. V., & Leonard, L. B. (1986). Word-finding abilities in language-impaired children.ASHA Monographs, 25, 1–39.
      Google Scholar
    • Kan, P. F., & Windsor, J. (2010). Word learning in children with primary language impairment: A meta-analysis.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 739–757.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Karpicke, J. D., & Bauernschmidt, A. (2011). Spaced retrieval: Absolute spacing enhances learning regardless of relative spacing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1250–1257.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping.Science, 331, 772–775.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Karpicke, J. D., Blunt, J. R., & Smith, M. A. (2016). Retrieval-based learning: Positive effects of retrieval practice in elementary school children.Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–9.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Karpicke, J. D., Lehman, M., & Aue, W. R. (2014). Retrieval-based learning: An episodic context account.In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 60). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Presshttps://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800283-4.00007-1
      Google Scholar
    • Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning.Science, 319, 966–968.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Kaufmann, A., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004). Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. Circle Pines, MN: AGS.
      Google Scholar
    • Kornilov, S. A., Magnuson, J. S., Rakhlin, N., Landi, N., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2015). Lexical processing deficits in children with developmental language disorder: An event-related potentials study.Development and Psychopathology, 27, 459–476.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP).Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621–647.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading sensless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity.Science, 207, 203–205.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Landauer, T. K., & Bjork, R. A. (1978). Optimum rehearsal patterns and name learning.In M. M. Gruneberg & P. E. Morris (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory (pp. 625–632). London, England: Academic Press.
      Google Scholar
    • Lee, L. (1974). Developmental sentence analysis. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
      Google Scholar
    • Lehman, M., Smith, M. A., & Karpicke, J. D. (2014). Toward an episodic context account of retrieval-based learning: Dissociating retrieval practice and elaboration.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 40, 1787–1794.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Leonard, L. B. (2014). Children with specific language impairment (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Leonard, L. B., Karpicke, J., Weber, C., Deevy, P., Christ, S., Haebig, E., Souto, S., Keuser, J., & Krok, W. (2019). Retrieval-based word learning in typically developing children and children with developmental language disorder I: The benefits of repeated retrieval.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-18-0070
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Leonard, L. B., Nippold, M. A., Kail, R. V., & Hale, C. A. (1983). Picture naming in language-impaired children.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 26, 609–615.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Linebarger, M. C., Schwartz, M. F., & Saffran, E. M. (1983). Sensitivity to grammatical structure in so-called agrammatic aphasics.Cognition, 13, 361–392.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Lopez-Calderon, J., & Luck, S. J. (2010). ERPLAB toolbox (1.1.0). Retrieved from http://erpinfo.org/erplab
      Google Scholar
    • Lucas, R., & Norbury, C. F. (2015). Making inferences from text: It's vocabulary that matters.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 58, 1224–1232.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Luck, S. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: MIT Press.
      Google Scholar
    • McGregor, K. K. (2014). What a difference a day makes: Change in memory for newly learned word forms over twenty-four hours.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57, 1842–1850.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • McGregor, K. K., Gordon, K., Eden, N., Arbisi-Kelm, T., & Oleson, J. (2017). Encoding deficits impede word learning and memory in adults with developmental language disorders.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60, 2891–2905.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • McGregor, K. K., Oleson, J., Bahnsen, A., & Duff, D. (2013). Children with developmental language impairment have vocabulary deficits characterized by limited breadth and depth.International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 48, 307–319.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • McMurray, B., Horst, J. S., & Samuelson, L. K. (2012). Word learning emerges from the interaction of online referent selection and slow associative learning.Psychological Review, 119, 831–877.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Mills, D. L., Coffey-Corina, S. A., & Neville, H. J. (1993). Language acquisition and cerebral specialization in 20-month-old infants.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 317–334.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Neville, H., Coffey, S. A., Holcomb, P. J., & Tallal, P. (1993). The neurobiology of sensory and language processing in language-impaired children.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 235–253.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Oetting, J. B., Rice, M. L., & Swank, L. K. (1995). Quick incidental learning (QUIL) of words by school age children with and without SLI.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 434–445.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory.Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Ouellette, G. P. (2006). What's meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word reading and reading comprehension.Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 554–566.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Pijnacker, J., Davids, N., Van Weerdenburg, M., Verhoeven, L., Knoors, H., & Van Alphen, P. (2017). Semantic processing of sentences in preschoolers with specific language impairment: Evidence from the N400 effect.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60, 627–639.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Quinn, J. M., Wagner, R. K., Petscher, Y., & Lopez, D. (2015). Developmental relations between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension: A latent change score modeling study.Child Development, 86, 159–175.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Renoult, L., Brodeur, M. B., & Debruille, J. B. (2010). Semantic processing of highly repeated concepts presented in single-word trials: Electrophysiological and behavioral correlates.Biological Psychology, 84, 206–220.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Renoult, L., & Debruille, J. B. (2009). N400-like potentials and reaction times index semantic relations between highly repeated individual words.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 905–922.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Rice, M. L., & Hoffman, L. (2015). Predicting vocabulary growth in children with and without specific language impairment: A longitudinal study from 2;6 to 21 years of age.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 58, 345–359.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Rice, M. L., Wexler, K., & Redmond, S. M. (1999). Grammaticality judments of extended optional infinitive grammar: Evidence from english-speaking children with specific langauge impairment.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 943–961.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Roark, B., & Demuth, K. (2000). Prosodic constraints and the learner's environment: A corpus study.In S. C. Howell, S. A. Fish, & T. Keith-Lucas (Eds.), BUCLD 24: Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 597–608). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
      Google Scholar
    • Sabisch, B., Hahne, A., Glass, E., von Suchodoletz, W., & Friederici, A. D. (2006). Lexical-semantic processes in children with specific language impairment.NeuroReport, 17, 1511–1514.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Schopler, E., Van Bourgondien, M., Wellman, G., & Love, S. (2010). Childhood Autism Rating Scale–Second Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
      Google Scholar
    • Silva-Pereyra, J., Rivera-Gaxiola, M., & Kuhl, P. K. (2005). An event-related brain potential study of sentence comprehension in preschoolers: Semantic and morphosyntactic processing.Cognitive Brain Research, 23, 247–258.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Storkel, H. L., & Hoover, J. R. (2010). An online calculator to compute phonotactic probability and neighborhood density on the basis of child corpora of spoken American English.Behavior Research Methods, 42, 497–506.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Storkel, H. L., Komesidou, R., Fleming, K. K., & Romine, R. S. (2017). Interactive book reading to accelerate word learning by kindergarten children with specific language impairment: Identifying adequate progress and successful learning patterns.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 48, 108–124.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Storkel, H. L., Voelmle, K., Fierro, V., Flake, K., Fleming, K. K., & Romine, R. S. (2017). Interactive book reading to accelerate word learning by kindergarten children with specific language impairment: Identifying an adequate intensity and variation in treatment response.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 48, 16–30.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Tomblin, J. B., Records, N. L., Buckwalter, P., Zhang, X., Smith, E., & O, Brien, M. (1997). Prevalence of specific language impairment in kindergarten children.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 1245–1260.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Ullman, M. T., & Pierpont, E. I. (2005). Specific language impairment is not specific to language: The procedural deficit hypothesis.Cortex, 41, 399–433.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Usler, E., & Weber-Fox, C. (2015). Neurodevelopment for syntactic processing distinguishes childhood stuttering recovery versus persistence.Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 7, 1–21.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar

    Additional Resources