Examining the Role of Processing Limitations in SLI - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 82
About This Presentation
Title:

Examining the Role of Processing Limitations in SLI

Description:

Number of rectangles presented at one time ranges from 2-6. Spatial Working Memory Task ... construct of processing limitations in SLI using measures from 8th grade Iowa dataset ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:70
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 83
Provided by: waisman
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Examining the Role of Processing Limitations in SLI


1
Examining the Role of Processing Limitations in
SLI
  • Susan Ellis Weismer
  • University of Wisconsin-Madison

2
Funding Acknowledgment
  • NIDCD P50 DC02746 (J. Bruce Tomblin, Director
    Ellis Weismer, Subcontract PI)
  • NIDCD T32 DC05359 (Ellis Weismer Kent, PIs)
  • NICHD, Grant P30 HD03352 (Waisman Center Core
    Grant)
  • University of Wisconsin Graduate School Research
    Committee Award (Project 020856)

3
UW-Madison Project Staff
  • Chris Hollar, Research Specialist
  • Heather Lohmeier, Research Specialist
  • Bryn Borgh, Associate Research Specialist
  • Susan Bunton, Associate Research Specialist
  • Maura (Jones) Moyle, Project Assistant (PhD)
  • Beth Roos, Project Assistant (PhD)
  • Student hourly assistants Laurie Eisenband, Erin
    Green, Jordan Scheid, Nicole Schad
  • UW-Madison Statistical Consultants
  • Associate Professor Daniel Bolt
  • Professor Mary Lindstrom

4
Theoretical Accounts of SLIProcessing Limitation
Deficit
  • Temporal Processing
  • Generalized Slowing hypothesis
  • Phonological Storage
  • Limited Processing Capacity in Working Memory
  • Executive Function deficit

5
Processing Limitations in SLI Claimed to Account
for Deficits in .
  • Speech perception (Tallal and colleagues)
  • Vocabulary development (Adams Gathercole, 2000
    Gathercole Baddeley, 1990)
  • Nonword repetition (Gathercole et al., 2005)
  • Novel word learning (Ellis Weismer Hesketh,
    1996, 1998)
  • Grammatical comprehension (Bishop, Adams,
    Rosen, 2006 Deevy Leonard, 2004 Montgomery,
    2000)
  • Morphological/syntactic production (Riches,
    Faragher, Conti-Ramsden, 2006)

6
Processing Limitations in SLI Claimed to Account
for Deficits in .
  • Mathematical abilities (Cowan et al., 2005
    Fazio, 1994, 1999)
  • Performance on nonverbal tasks (Miller, Kail,
    Leonard, Tomblin, 2001 Bavin et al., 2005)

7
Cognitive Processes Investigated Relative to
Processing Limitations
  • Auditory temporal processing
  • Speed of processing
  • Working memory verbal/visuospatial
  • Phonological storage
  • Executive function dual processing, response
    inhibition/suppression, generativity, attentional
    control

8
Theoretical Models of Information Processing and
Memory
  • Generalized speed of processing (Kail, Salthouse)
  • Multiple-component model of WM (Baddeley,
    Gathercole)
  • Capacity theory of comprehension (Just,
    Carpenter)
  • Embedded-processes model of WM (Cowan)

9
Alternate View
  • MacDonald Christiansen (2002)
  • Propose that processing capacity is not distinct
    from long-term linguistic knowledge
  • Preliminary study by Mainela-Arnold Evans
    (2005) reports findings interpreted to support
    this view

10
Broad Research Aim
  • Determine the role of processing limitations in
    specific language impairment, with a primary
    focus on working memory
  • Cognitive Processes phonological storage,
    verbal and spatial complex WM, executive function
    (dual processing and allocation of attentional
    resources)

11
Prior Findings for School-age Children with SLI
  • Reduced WM on a listening span measure
  • Problems with dual processing, such that their
    competing listening scores were
    disproportionately poorer than their
    non-competing scores compared to NL controls
  • Deficits in nonword repetition interpreted as
    reflecting limitations in phonological WM
  • (Ellis Weismer, Evans, Hesketh, 1999 Ellis
    Weismer Thordardottir, 2002 Ellis Weismer et
    al., 2000)

12
Functional MRI Investigation of Verbal WM in SLI
  • Combined use of neuroimaging and behavioral
    techniques
  • Do children with SLI exhibit atypical patterns of
    neural activity during a verbal working memory
    task compared to NL controls?
  • Ellis Weismer, Plante, Jones, Tomblin (2005)

13
fMRI Investigation Findings
  • Behavioral data
  • Large group difference in word recognition
    accuracy
  • SLI group exhibited longer RTs than NL group
    during encoding of high syntactic complexity
    items
  • Ellis Weismer et al. (2005)

14
fMRI Investigation Findings
  • Imaging data
  • SLI group displayed hypoactivation in regions
    implicated in attentional control mechanisms
    (PAR) and memory (PRCS), as well in an area
    implicated in language processing (IFG)
  • Atypical patterns of co-activation among brain
    regions
  • Support claim of constraints in nonlinguistic
    systems
  • Ellis Weismer et al. (2005)

15
Processing Capacity Limitations in SLI Part II
16
Midwest Collaboration on Specific Language
ImpairmentNIH P50 DC02746J. Bruce Tomblin,
Director
  • Project 2
  • Limitations in Processing Capacity

17
Epidemiologic Longitudinal Study of SLI
  • Population-based sample of children with SLI
    identified at kindergarten (5 years old)
  • Language, cognitive and social assessments
    conducted at 2nd, 4th, 8th, and 10th grades

18
Sample(N527) 8th grade diagnosis
  • SLI - normal cognition, low language (n59)
  • NLI - low cognition, low language (n80)
  • NL - normal cognition, normal language (n316)
  • LC - low cognition, normal language (n72)

19
Sample(N504) 10th grade diagnosis
  • LI - language impairment, SLI NLI (n139)
  • NL - normal language (n365)

20
  • Do adolescents with LI (SLI/NLI) exhibit
    limitations in verbal WM?

21
Processing Capacity Tasks
  • Verbal WM
  • - WJ-III Auditory Working Memory subtest
  • - Nonword Repetition Task, NRT
  • - Competing Language Processing Task, CLPT
  • - Grammatical Judg Listening Span
  • Spatial WM
  • - Spatial working memory task
  • Sentence Discourse Processing
  • - Complex Sentence Comprehension Task
  • - Discourse Processing Task

22
Auditory Working Memory Test 9Woodcock-Johnson
III
  • Series of digits and words (e.g., dog, 1, shoe,
    8, 2, apple)
  • Presented via audio recording
  • Participants first report the objects, then the
    digits, in sequential order

23
Nonword Repetition Task(Dollaghan Campbell,
1998)
  • 16 nonsense words (1- 4 syllables)
  • Characteristics of nonwords
  • Consist of early developing phonemes
  • Do not follow English metrical stress patterns
  • Syllables do not correspond to English words
  • Children repeat nonword immediately following
    each stimulus

24
Nonword Repetition Task
  • 1 syllable /doif/
  • 2 syllable /vae?aip/
  • 3 syllable /doitauvaeb/
  • 4 syllable /daevounoi?ig/

25
Competing Language Processing Task(CLPT, Gaulin
Campbell, 1994)
  • Sets of 1 to 6 short sentences after each
    sentence child responds true or false
  • Concurrently, the child is asked to recall the
    last word in each sentence after the set has been
    presented

26
CLPT(Gaulin Campbell, 1994)
27
Grammatical Judgment Listening Span Task
  • Concurrent tasks consist of sentence
    grammaticality judgments and final word recall
    for each set of sentences (2-6 sentences in
    length)
  • Judgments include optional infinitive (OI) and
    non-optional infinitive (NOI) morphemes
  • Optional infinitive morphemes are regular
    past/third person singular Non-optional
    infinitives are plurals and possessives

28
Grammatical Judgment Listening Span Task
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
(No Transcript)
37
(No Transcript)
38
(No Transcript)
39
(No Transcript)
40
(No Transcript)
41
(No Transcript)
42
(No Transcript)
43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
(No Transcript)
47
(No Transcript)
48
(No Transcript)
49
  • Is verbal WM distinguishable from language
    comprehension and production?
  • Does verbal WM contribute unique variance to
    language outcomes?

50
CLPT
.46
Listening Span OI
.73
.57
.66
Working Memory
.93
Listening Span NOI
.64
.45
.58
.81
Spatial WM
.60
.31
Confirmatory Factor Analysis Normal Language
Group
.45
NRT
.64
.88
WJ Aud WM
.56
.15
.18
PPVT
.85
.48
Language Comp/Prod
1.28
.51
CELF Following Directions
.84
.76
CELF Sentence Repetition
.43
Chi-Square147.2, df63, plt.001, GFI.90,
CFI.96, TLI.95, RMSEA.07
51
CLPT
.50
Listening Span OI
.54
.73
Working Memory
.66
1.20
Listening Span NOI
.99
.64
.58
.87
Spatial WM
.85
.31
Confirmatory Factor Analysis LI Group
.45
NRT
1.29
.45
WJ Aud WM
.85
.15
.18
PPVT
.55
Language Comp/Prod
.48
.22
CELF Following Directions
.51
.45
.57
CELF Sentence Repetition
.44
Chi-Square147.2, df63, plt.001, GFI.90,
CFI.96, TLI.95, RMSEA.07
52
Does 2nd grade verbal WM contribute unique
variance (beyond early language scores) to the
prediction of 10th grade language outcomes?
53
R2.43
54
R2.51
55
R2.68
56
Do WM limitations extend beyond the verbal
domain?
57
Visuospatial WM in SLI
  • Mixed evidences for deficits
  • Archibald Gathercole (2006)
  • Hoffman Gillam (2004)
  • Hick, Botting, Conti-Ramsden (2005)
  • Bavin, Wilson, Maruff, Sleeman (2005)

58
Spatial Working Memory Task
  • Complex odd-one-out paradigm adapted from a
    measure developed by Russell, Jarrold, Henry
    (1996) to investigate WM in autism
  • Similar measure used by Nation and colleagues
    (Nation, Adams, Bowyer-Crane Snowling, 1999) to
    examine memory in normal readers and poor
    comprehenders

59
Spatial Working Memory Task
  • Presentation of a series of shapes contained
    within a divided rectangle
  • Children point to the shape that is different
    from the other two
  • Number of rectangles presented at one time ranges
    from 2-6

60
Spatial Working Memory Task
  • After each exposure trial, a blank grid is
    displayed
  • Children point to location in each rectangle
    where oddball shape occurred
  • Taps storage capacity

61
(No Transcript)
62
(No Transcript)
63
(No Transcript)
64
Examination of Strategy Use
65
(No Transcript)
66
(No Transcript)
67
(No Transcript)
68
(No Transcript)
69
(No Transcript)
70
Summary
  • Consistent, replicated group differences across a
    variety of verbal WM measures
  • Deficits remain when indices of extant language
    abilities used as covariates/when language
    impairment has resolved
  • Structure of measures suggests that verbal WM and
    Language are two distinct factors

71
Summary
  • Verbal WM provides unique prediction to language
    outcomes
  • WM difficulties in visuospatial domain indicate
    general processing limitations

72
Issues for Alternate View of MacDonald
Christensen (2002)
  • Robust syllable length effect on NRT
  • Lack of interaction between grammatical deficits
    (OI) in SLI and recall performance for sentences
    containing those forms
  • Dissociations between language and WM in
    individual cases
  • Evidence for domain-general WM limitations

73
InterpretationInteractive-Multiple Path Account
  • WM appears to play a role in SLI, but other
    cognitive processes have also been implicated
  • Other research has indicated that cognitive
    stressors involving either reduced speed of
    processing or memory capacity can elicit SLI
    profiles (Hayiou-Thomas, Bishop, Plunkett,
    2004)
  • Important to determine relation between cognitive
    processes

74
Speed of Processing and WM Leonard,
Ellis Weismer, Miller, Francis, Tomblin, Kail
(in review)
  • Examined construct of processing limitations in
    SLI using measures from 8th grade Iowa dataset
  • Speed and WM function as separable factors in
    SLI, with separate verbal/nonverbal dimensions
  • Verbal WM nonverbal cognitive speed OR general
    processing speed ? 62 variance in concurrent
    language composite scores

75
Interpretation
  • Consideration of individual data as well as group
    findings
  • As is the case for WM, not all children with SLI
    exhibit speed of processing deficits (Miller et
    al., 2001)
  • Multiple language emergence routes that can lead
    to poor language abilities

76
Future Directions
  • Conduct detailed studies of cognitive processes
    besides speed of processing and WM, especially
    executive function and attention
  • Further explore the domain specificity issue
  • Gather converging evidence from different sources
    (imaging, ERP, modeling)
  • Investigate the relation between different
    cognitive processes relative to their
    contributions to processing limitations

77
Le Fin, Merci!
78
(No Transcript)
79
Nonword RepetitionGrade 2 Grade 8
R.68 R2.47
80
CLPT Word RecallGrade 3 Grade 8


R .57 R2.33
81
Correlation Between Experimental and Diagnostic
MeasuresDiagnostic Battery Grade 8
plt .01
82
Correlation Between Experimental Measures
plt .01
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com