No access
Research Note
16 October 2024

The Effect of Sampling Context on Preschoolers' Finite Verb Morphology Composite Scores

Publication: Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools
Volume 55, Number 4
Pages 1179-1187

Abstract

Purpose:

The finite verb morphology composite (FVMC) is a valid measure for charting children's tense development and for differentiating children with and without language impairment during preschool and early elementary years. However, it is unclear whether FVMC scores vary as a function of language sample elicitation contexts. The current study evaluated the performance on FVMC in preschool-aged children across different language sampling contexts.

Method:

Participants were 38 English-speaking children who were between the ages of 3 and 4 years and below the mastery level of tense usage in three language sampling contexts, including conversation (free-play), picture description, and narratives (story retell). FVMC from each sampling context was computed by calculating the overall accuracy of copula be, auxiliary be, third-person singular present –s, and past tense –ed combined. A linear mixed-effects model comparison was carried out to determine the effect of sampling context on FVMC scores.

Results:

After controlling for child age, mean length of utterance, and the number of obligatory contexts for FVMC scoring, FVMC scores were significantly higher in conversation than in picture description and narratives. In addition, FVMC scores across the three sampling contexts were significantly correlated (rs ≥ .62, p < .001).

Conclusions:

Although children's performance on FVMC relative to each other was quite stable across sampling contexts, FVMC scores may vary with sampling contexts. As compared to picture description and narratives, conversation may not adequately capture the limitation in preschoolers' tense development that is important for therapeutic planning.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2022a). Schools Survey report: SLP caseload characteristics trends 2004–2022. https://www.asha.org/siteassets/surveys/2022-schools-survey-caseload-characteristics-trends.pdf [PDF]
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2022b). 2022 Schools Survey: SLP workforce and work conditions. https://www.asha.org/siteassetssurveys/2022-schools-survey-slp-workforce.pdf [PDF]
Bawayan, R., & Brown, J. A. (2022). Language sample analysis consideration and use: A survey of school-based speech language pathologists. Clinical Archives of Communication Disorders, 7(1), 15–28.
Bedore, L. M., & Leonard, L. B. (1998). Specific language impairment and grammatical morphology: A discriminant function analysis. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41(5), 1185–1192.
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Harvard University Press.
Charest, M., & Johnston, J. R. (2011). Processing load in children's language production: A clinically oriented review of research. Canadian Journal of Speech-Language Pathology & Audiology, 35(1), 18–31.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
Dawson, J., Eyer, J. A., & Fonkalsrud, J. (2005). Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–Preschool 2. Janelle.
Dollaghan, C. A., Campbell, T. F., & Tomlin, R. (1990). Video narration as a language sampling context. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55(3), 582–590.
Eisenberg, S., & Guo, L. Y. (2016). Using language sample analysis in clinical practice: Measures of grammatical accuracy for identifying language impairment in preschool and school-aged children. Seminars in Speech and Language, 37(2), 106–116.
Eisenberg, S. L., Guo, L. Y., & Germezi, M. (2012). How grammatical are 3-year-olds? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43(1), 36–52.
Eisenberg, S. L., Guo, L. Y., & Mucchetti, E. (2018). Eliciting the language sample for developmental sentence scoring: A comparison of play with toys and elicited picture description. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 27(2), 633–646.
Goffman, L., & Leonard, J. (2000). Growth of language skills in preschool children with specific language impairment: Implications for assessment and intervention. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9(2), 151–161.
Greenslade, K. J., Plante, E., & Vance, R. (2009). The diagnostic accuracy and construct validity of the Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–Preschool: Second Edition. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40(2), 150–160.
Grela, B. G., & Leonard, L. B. (2000). The influence of argument-structure complexity on the use of auxiliary verbs by children with SLI. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43(5), 1115–1125.
Guo, L. Y., & Eisenberg, S. (2014). The diagnostic accuracy of two tense measures for identifying 3-year-olds with language impairment. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 23(2), 203–212.
Guo, L. Y., Eisenberg, S., Schneider, P., & Spencer, L. (2020). Finite verb morphology composite between age 4 and age 9 for the Edmonton Narrative Norms Instrument: Reference data and psychometric properties. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 51(1), 128–143.
Guo, L. Y., Spencer, L. J., & Tomblin, J. B. (2013). Acquisition of tense marking in English-speaking children with cochlear implants: A longitudinal study. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 18(2), 187–205.
Lahey, M., Liebergott, J., Chesnick, M., Menyuk, P., & Adams, J. (1992). Variability in children's use of grammatical morphemes. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13(3), 373–398.
Lenhart, M. H., Timler, G. R., Pavelko, S. L., Bronaugh, D. A., & Dudding, C. C. (2022). Syntactic complexity across language sampling contexts in school-age children, ages 8–11 years. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 53(4), 1168–1176.
Loban, W. (1976). Language development: Kindergarten through grade twelve. National Council of Teachers of English.
Masterson, J. J., & Kamhi, A. G. (1991). The effects of sampling conditions on sentence production in normal, reading-disabled, and language-learning-disabled children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34(3), 549–558.
Mayer, M. (1969). Frog, where are you? Dial.
Miller, J. F., Andriacchi, K., & Nockerts, A. (2019). Assessing language production using SALT software: A clinician's guide to language sample analysis. SALT Software.
Nippold, M. A., Frantz-Kaspar, M. W., Cramond, P. M., Kirk, C., Hayward-Mayhew, C., & MacKinnon, M. (2014). Conversational and narrative speaking in adolescents: Examining the use of complex syntax. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57(3), 876–886.
Nippold, M. A., Hesketh, L. J., Duthie, J. K., & Mansfield, T. C. (2005). Conversational versus expository discourse: A study of syntactic development in children, adolescents, and adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48(5), 1048–1064.
Owen, A. J. (2010). Factors affecting accuracy of past tense production in children with specific language impairment and their typically developing peers: The influence of verb transitivity, clause location, and sentence type. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53(4), 993–1014.
Pavelko, S. L., Owens, R. E., Jr., Ireland, M., & Hahs-Vaughn, D. L. (2016). Use of language sample analysis by school-based SLPs: Results of a nationwide survey. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 47(3), 246–258.
Pawłowska, M. (2014). Evaluation of three proposed markers for language impairment in English: A meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57(6), 2261–2273.
Pezold, M. J., Imgrund, C. M., & Storkel, H. L. (2020). Using computer programs for language sample analysis. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 51(1), 103–114.
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (2003). Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales: Professional manual. PaR.
Rice, M. (2003). A unified model of specific and general language delay: Grammatical tense as a clinical marker of unexpected variation. In Y. Levy & J. Schaeffer (Eds.), Language competence across populations (pp. 63–94). Erlbaum.
Rice, M., & Wexler, K. (2001). Test for Early Grammatical Impairment. The Psychological Corporation.
Rice, M., Wexler, K., & Hershberger, S. (1998). Tense over time: The longitudinal course of tense acquisition in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41(6), 1412–1431.
Rudolph, J. M., Dollaghan, C. A., & Crotteau, S. (2019). The finite verb morphology composite: Values from a community sample. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62(6), 1813–1822.
Sealey, L. R., & Gilmore, S. E. (2008). Effects of sampling context on the finite verb production of children with and without delayed language development. Journal of Communication Disorders, 41(3), 223–258.
Shriberg, L. D., Kwiatkowski, J., & Hoffman, K. (1984). A procedure for phonetic transcription by consensus. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 27(3), 456–465.
Southwood, F., & Russell, A. F. (2004). Comparison of conversation, freeplay, and story generation as methods of language sample elicitation. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47(2), 366–376.
Souto, S. M., Leonard, L. B., & Deevy, P. (2014). Identifying risk for specific language impairment with narrow and global measures of grammar. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 28(10), 741–756.
Spencer, T. D., Tolentino, T. J., & Foster, M. E. (2023). Impact of discourse type and elicitation task on language sampling outcomes. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 32(6), 2827–2845.
Thordardottir, E. (2008). Language-specific effects of task demands on the manifestation of specific language impairment: A comparison of English and Icelandic. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51(4), 922–937.
Wagner, C. R., Nettelbladt, U., Sahlén, B., & Nilholm, C. (2000). Conversation versus narration in pre-school children with language impairment. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 35(1), 83–93.
Westerveld, M. F., & Vidler, K. (2016). Spoken language samples of Australian children in conversation, narration and exposition. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 18(3), 288–298.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools
Volume 55Number 416 October 2024
Pages: 1179-1187
PubMed: 39413151

History

  • Received: Dec 16, 2023
  • Revised: Mar 12, 2024
  • Accepted: May 24, 2024
  • Published online: Jul 30, 2024
  • Published in issue: Oct 16, 2024

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY
Department of Communicative Disorders and Sciences, University at Buffalo, NY
Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Asia University, Taichung, Taiwan

Notes

Brian Weiler is now at the Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN. Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing financial or nonfinancial interests existed at the time of publication.
Correspondence to Ling-Yu Guo: [email protected]
Editor-in-Chief: Kelly Farquharson
Editor: Karla Nadine Washington

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Article Metrics
View all metrics



Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

View Options

Sign In Options

ASHA member? If so, log in with your ASHA website credentials for full access.

Member Login

View options

PDF

View PDF

Full Text

View Full Text

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share