Quantity Of Language Input Research Articles

Comparing Different Methods That Measure Bilingual Children’s Language Environment: A Closer Look at Audio Recordings and Questionnaires

The quantity of language input is a relevant predictor of children’s language development and is frequently used as a variable in child bilingualism research. Studies use various methods to measure bilingual language input quantity, but it is currently unknown what the optimal method is. We investigated the bilingual language input estimates of 31 Turkish–Dutch and 21 Polish–Dutch 3- to 5-year-old bilingual children, obtained via the questionnaire for Quantifying Bilingual Experience (Q-BEx) and day-long audio recordings made with Language Environment Analysis (LENA), and proposed a combined method that could overcome several shortcomings of the individual methods. The three methods are compared to each other in their correlation strength with receptive and expressive vocabulary scores. Each individual method correlated significantly with vocabulary scores, regardless of modality or language. Contrary to our hypothesis, the combined method did not correlate stronger with vocabulary outcomes than the Q-BEx and LENA individually did. The latter two did not differ significantly from each other in their correlational strength with vocabulary outcomes. These findings show that both the Q-BEx, LENA, and combined method can be deemed reliable to measure bilingual language input quantity. Future studies can make more informed decisions about their methodology in children’s bilingualism research.

Natural Language Input: Maternal Education, Socioeconomic Deprivation, and Language Outcomes in Typically Developing Children.

Purpose The current study was designed to investigate the differences in language input related to family factors (maternal level of education [MLE] and socioeconomic level of deprivation [SLD]) and their association with language outcomes in preschoolers. Method This study used New Zealand SLD and MLE classification systems to examine differences in language input related to these factors among 20 typically developing preschool children aged 2-5 years. The quantity of children's language input (adult words [AWs], conversational turns [CTs]) was calculated using the Language ENvironment Analysis audiotaping technology for two typical weekend days. Four 5-min Language ENvironment Analysis recording segments were transcribed and coded, and parental language strategies were classified as optimal language strategy, moderate language strategy, or sub-optimal language strategy (S-OLS) for child language outcomes. The receptive and expressive language of each child was assessed using the Preschool Language Scales-Fifth Edition. Results Mann-Whitney U tests showed significant differences between the quantity of language input (AWs/hr, CTs/hr) for high and low MLE and high and low SLD groups. Consistent with the literature, the use of S-OLSs was significantly lower for families with high MLE (Mdn = .25, IQR = .14) and low SLD (Mdn = .22, IQR = .13) than for families with low MLE (Mdn = .41, IQR = .24) and high SLD (Mdn = .41, IQR = .26). Spearman correlation coefficients indicated significant associations between language input (AWs/hr, CTs/hr, S-OLSs) and language outcomes. Conclusions Reduced language input and the frequent use of S-OLSs associated with low maternal education and high deprivation and low language outcomes for these children highlight the importance for all parents/families to learn optimal language strategies to support the development of strong language skills in their children in young age.

Probability of Heritage Language Use at a Supportive Early Childhood Setting in Australia

© Copyright © 2020 Escudero, Jones Diaz, Hajek, Wigglesworth and Smit. Despite well-established research that documents the intellectual, linguistic, sociocultural and familiar benefits of early childhood bilingualism, Australia's provision of heritage language (HL) support in early childhood (EC) settings is fairly minimal, resulting in little to no access to the HL outside of the home. We report on language data from a long day care preschool that has an open bilingual policy, where two languages (HL and English) are used in naturalistic interactions between children and educators. While the quantity of language input and output is known to impact on language proficiency, there are no prior studies which focus on establishing the quantitative nature of naturalistic language production in a bilingual preschool. Our goal was to document the relative language input and output of HL and English and to examine whether there are differences across age groups in the EC setting, and during different activity types. We followed a quantitative approach in data analysis, with child and educator observations over a period of 8 weeks and an analysis of targeted videos amounting to close to an hour of recordings per child. We used Bayesian modeling to test the probability of HL use in the different age groups and per activity type. Overall, HL input was higher for toddlers than preschoolers and toddlers received more HL input than English, while preschoolers received comparable input in both languages. The higher probability of HL input in toddlers was particularly evident during story time and playing activities. Our results indicate a high level of HL use in this EC setting, suggesting success in HL maintenance and promotion of early bilingualism. Further research should explore the children's relative language output in relation to their input, individual differences, as well as extending the current methodology to other similar settings in Australia.

The development of phonological memory and language: A multiple groups approach.

Pierce et al. (2017) have proposed that variations in the timing, quality and quantity of language input during the earliest stages of development are related to variations in the development of phonological working memory and, in turn, to later language learning outcomes. To examine this hypothesis, three groups of children who are at-risk for language learning were examined: children with cochlear implants (CI), children with developmental language disorder (DLD), and internationally-adopted (IA) children, Comparison groups of typically-developing monolingual (MON) children and second language (L2) learners were also included. All groups were acquiring French as a first or second language and were matched on age, gender, and socioeconomic status, as well as other group-specific factors; they were between 5;0-7;3 years of age at time of testing. The CI and DLD groups scored significantly more poorly on the memory measures than the other groups; while the IA and L2 groups did not differ from one another. While the IA group performed more poorly than the MON group, there was no difference between the L2 and MON groups. We also found differential developmental relationships between phonological memory and language among the groups of interest in comparison to the typically-developing MON and L2 groups supporting the hypothesis that language experiences early in life are consequential for language development because of their effects on the development of phonological memory.

Associations among the home language environment and neural activity during infancy

Characteristics of the home language environment, independent of socioeconomic background, may account for disparities in early language abilities. Past studies have reported links between the quantity of language input within the home and differences in brain function during early childhood. The current study examined associations between home language input and EEG brain activity in a socioeconomically diverse sample of 6- to 12-month-old infants (N = 94). Replicating past studies, a positive correlation was found between measures of socioeconomic status and language input. Examining links between language input and brain activity, analyses yielded a negative association, with children who heard more adult words in the home demonstrating reduced EEG beta power (13–19 Hz) in the parietal region. Exploratory analyses revealed a significant interaction between language input and the amount of chaos and disorganization in the home. Specifically, among children living in high-chaos households, children who heard more adult words tended to have reduced EEG activity. Among children living in low-chaos homes, there was no link between adult word count and children’s EEG activity. These findings demonstrate the importance of the early home environment context in shaping neurocognitive trajectories.

Analysis of Amount and Style of Oral Interaction Related to Language Outcomes in Children With Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review (2006-2016).

Purpose This systematic review summarizes the evidence for differences in the amount of language input between children with and without hearing loss (HL). Of interest to this review is evaluating the associations between language input and language outcomes (receptive and expressive) in children with HL in order to enhance insight regarding what oral language input is associated with good communication outcomes. Method A systematic review was conducted using keywords in 3 electronic databases: Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Keywords were related to language input, language outcomes, and HL. Titles and abstracts were screened independently, and full-text manuscripts meeting inclusion criteria were extracted. An appraisal checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of studies as poor, good, or excellent. Results After removing duplicates, 1,545 study results were extracted, with 27 eligible for full-text review. After the appraisal, 8 studies were included in this systematic review. Differences in the amount of language input between children with and without HL were noted. Conversational exchanges, open-ended questions, expansions, recast, and parallel talk were positively associated with stronger receptive and expressive language scores. The quality of evidence was not assessed as excellent for any of the included studies. Conclusions This systematic review reveals low-level evidence from 8 studies that specific language inputs (amount and style) are optimal for oral language outcomes in children with HL. Limitations were identified as sample selection bias, lack of information on control of confounders and assessment protocols, and limited duration of observation/recordings. Future research should address these limitations.

Language activities in a minority-majority language context: book-reading at home is more important for Frisian than for Dutch.

Previous research has shown that in a minority-majority language context, the quantity of language input at home is more important for the development of the minority language than for the development of the majority language. In the current study, we examined whether the same holds true for the frequency of specific language activities at home. In a group of five- and six-year-old Frisian-Dutch bilingual children (n = 120), we investigated to what extent vocabulary and morphology knowledge were predicted by reading activities, watching TV, and story-telling activities in both languages. The results showed that reading in Frisian predicted both Frisian vocabulary and morphology, while reading in Dutch only predicted Dutch vocabulary. This shows that reading at home is most important for the development of the minority language. This especially holds true for the acquisition of Frisian morphology, a domain that is known to be vulnerable in language acquisition.

Variations in phonological working memory: Linking early language experiences and language learning outcomes

ABSTRACTIn order to build complex language from perceptual input, children must have access to a powerful information processing system that can analyze, store, and use regularities in the signal to which the child is exposed. In this article, we propose that one of the most important parts of this underlying machinery is the linked set of cognitive and language processing components that comprise the child's developing working memory (WM). To examine this hypothesis, we explore how variations in the timing, quality, and quantity of language input during the earliest stages of development are related to variations in WM, especially phonological WM (PWM), and in turn language learning outcomes. In order to tease apart the relationships between early language experience, WM, and language development, we review research findings from studies of groups of language learners who clearly differ with respect to these aspects of input. Specifically, we consider the development of PWM in children with delayed exposure to language, that is, children born profoundly deaf and exposed to oral language following cochlear implantation and internationally adopted children who have delayed exposed to the adoption language; children who experience impoverished language input, that is, children who experience early bouts of otitis media and signing deaf children born to nonsigning hearing parents; and children with enriched early language input, that is, simultaneous bilinguals and second language learners.

Considering the (separable) influences of phonological sensitivity and working memory on language learning outcomes

In their keynote article examining links between early experience, phonological working memory, and language outcomes, Pierce, Genessee, Delcenserie, and Morgan (2017) present, what I argue, is a two-pronged hypothesis. In brief, the thesis is that the timing of language exposure and the quality and quantity of language input during an early sensitive period of phonological development shape the quality of phonological representations later used by the phonological working memory system to support short- and long-term language learning. The hypothesis is two-pronged because it hinges on (a) qualitative differences in the development of phonological representations, resulting in (b) variations in the efficiency of working memory as the key constraint on language learning. In this commentary, I examine support for these two prongs in detail.

Bilingualism in children with autism spectrum disorder: Making evidence based recommendations.

Over half of the world's population speaks more than one language (Ansaldo, Marcotte, Scherer, & Raboyeau, 2008), and thus many children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) will be raised in bilingual families. ASD is among the most common neurodevelopmental disorders, affecting one in 68 children (Wingate et al., 2014). It is characterized by deficits in social communication, as well as restrictive, repetitive, and stereotyped behaviors (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Since many children with ASD also present language deficits (Rapin & Dunn, 1997), it is often recommended that bilingual families of children with ASD focus on the language of schooling and refrain from using the family's home language with their child in order to avoid language confusion or further language delays (Jegatheesan, Fowler, & Miller, 2010). Recent research has questioned whether these recommendations are well founded. Does bilingualism truly increase language delays in children with ASD? Will bilingualism lead to language confusion in these children? What are the implications of recommendations that discourage bilingualism, both for the child's development and for the family's overall well-being? The goal of this paper is to answer these important questions by reviewing the literature available in the field of autism specifically and within the broader field of bilingual language development. By doing so, we aim to assist professionals working in the field of ASD in providing recommendations that are evidence-based to bilingual families affected by ASD.Bilingualism in Neurotypical ChildrenBroadly speaking, bilingualism refers to an individual's ability to communicate in two languages. Bilinguals can be placed on a continuum that ranges from individuals who know a few phrases in a second language to those who are equally proficient in their two languages. When speaking about bilingualism, the term majority language is used to refer to the language spoken by the majority of individuals in a given environment, while the terms minority, home, or heritage language refer to the language spoken by a minority of speakers in a given community. For many bilingual speakers, their languages are closely linked to the culture associated to each language they speak (Kremer-Sadlik, 2005). Given the importance and, for some families, the necessity of bilingualism, multiple studies have examined the effects of bilingualism on language development in neurotypical bilinguals, and more recently, in children with language, cognitive and/or developmental delays, including children with ASD. Overall, research suggests that neurotypical children can become proficient in their two languages, even attaining abilities similar to those of monolinguals. That said, although bilingual children share many similarities with their monolingual peers, bilingual children should not be considered to be two monolinguals in one child. Indeed, several differences exist between bilinguals and monolinguals, particularly during the first few years of language acquisition. The following paragraphs will address these issues and discuss some of factors that influence language acquisition and proficiency in neurotypical bilingual children.Several factors including (a) age of language acquisition, (b) amount of language input, and (c) social factors tied to the language context can affect the pace of language development in one or both of a bilingual child's languages (MacLeod, CastellanosRyan, Parent, Jacques, & Seguin, 2017; MacLeod, Fabiano-Smith, Boegner-Page, & Fontolliet, 2013; Thordardottir, 2011). When addressing differences in age of language acquisition, bilinguals are often divided into two groups reflecting the age at which they began to learn their second language. Simultaneous bilinguals are individuals who acquired both languages more or less at the same time, usually before the age of 3 years, whereas sequential bilinguals are those who acquired their second language after having acquired their first language, usually after 3 years of age (Paradis, Genesee, & Crago, 2011), although there is considerable variability within the literature with regard to the age cut-off that defines these two groups (see Paradis et al. …

Relationships between quantity of language input and brain responses in bilingual and monolingual infants

The present investigation explored the relation between the amount of language input and neural responses in English monolingual (N=18) and Spanish-English bilingual (N=19) infants. We examined the mismatch negativity (MMN); both the positive mismatch response (pMMR) and the negative mismatch response (nMMR), and identify a relationship between amount of language input and brain measures of speech discrimination for native and non-native speech sounds (i.e., Spanish, English and Chinese). Brain responses differed as a function of language input for native speech sounds in both monolinguals and bilinguals. Monolingual infants with high language input showed nMMRs to their native English contrast. Bilingual infants with high language input in Spanish and English showed pMMRs to both their native contrasts. The non-native speech contrast showed different patterns of brain activation for monolinguals and bilinguals regardless of amount of language input. Our results indicate that phonological representations of non-native speech sounds in bilingual infants are dependent on the phonetic similarities between their native languages.

The Contribution of Early Communication Quality to Low-Income Children’s Language Success

The disparity in the amount and quality of language that low-income children hear relative to their more-affluent peers is often referred to as the 30-million-word gap. Here, we expand the literature about this disparity by reporting the relative contributions of the quality of early parent-child communication and the quantity of language input in 60 low-income families. Including both successful and struggling language learners from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development, we noted wide variation in the quality of nonverbal and verbal interactions (symbol-infused joint engagement, routines and rituals, fluent and connected communication) at 24 months, which accounted for 27% of the variance in expressive language 1 year later. These indicators of quality were considerably more potent predictors of later language ability than was the quantity of mothers’ words during the interaction or sensitive parenting. Bridging the word gap requires attention to how caregivers and children establish a communication foundation within low-income families.

Comparison of Shared Reading versus Emergent Reading: How the Two Provide Distinct Opportunities for Early Literacy

This study examined mother-child interactions across two types of reading interactions—shared reading versus emergent reading—in order to determine (a) if mothers and children provide the same amount of language input across the two interactions, (b) if the socioemotional quality is consistent across the interactions, and (c) if the language input and socioemotional quality across the two interactions are differentially associated with children’s scores on early literacy assessments. Twenty-five mother-child dyads participated in both interactions. Children were given a standardized test of early reading and an emergent reading score based on a rubric designed particularly for the book they were reading. Results indicated that during the shared reading mothers provided more language input (i.e., they talked more), but children increased their amount of talk during the emergent reading, making such input effects null. Overall, socioemotional quality was consistent across the two interactions, except mothers provide more literacy feedback during shared reading. Both language input and socioemotional quality were associated with higher scores on early literacy assessments, but the contribution of these factors varied depending across the type of reading interaction. Results are discussed in terms of education implications for literacy practices at home and school.

What you hear and what you say: language performance in Spanish–English bilinguals

Purpose. This study assesses the factors that contribute to Spanish and English language development in bilingual children. Method. Seven hundred and fifty-seven Hispanic prekindergarten and kindergarten-age children completed screening tests of semantic and morphosyntactic development in Spanish and English. Parents provided information about their occupation and education as well as their children's English and Spanish exposure. Data were analyzed using zero-inflated regression models (comprising a logistic regression component and a negative binomial or Poisson component) to explore factors that contributed to children initiating L1 and L2 performance and factors that contributed to building children's knowledge. Results. Factors that were positively associated with initiating L1 and L2 performance were language input/output, free and reduced lunch, and age. Factors associated with building knowledge included age, parent education, input/output, free and reduced lunch, and school district. Conclusion. Amount of language input is important as children begin to use a language, and amount of language output is important for adding knowledge to their language. Semantic development seemed to be driven more by input while morphosyntax development relied on both input and output. Clinicians who assess bilingual children should examine children's language output in their second language to better understand their levels of performance.

RAISING CHILDREN BILINGUALLY THROUGH THE ‘ONE PARENT-ONE LANGUAGE’ APPROACH: A CASE STUDY OF JAPANESE MOTHERS IN THE AUSTRALIAN CONTEXT. Takeuchi

RAISING CHILDREN BILINGUALLY THROUGH THE ‘ONE PARENT-ONE LANGUAGE’ APPROACH: A CASE STUDY OF JAPANESE MOTHERS IN THE AUSTRALIAN CONTEXT. Takeuchi. Bern: Peter Lang, 2006. Pp. xv + 385. $68.95 paper.Research on child language acquisition within bilingual families adhering to the “One Parent-One Language” (OPOL) approach has focused on parental attitudes, language status (Romaine, 1989), the quantity of language input (Clyne, 1987; Schlyter, 1993), and the quality of parent-child interactions (Dopke, 1992; Lanza, 1997). Masae Takeuchi's work offers a valuable overview of this past research and reports on her own dissertation study of 25 OPOL families in Australia. Takeuchi adds to the growing body of data demonstrating that the quality of interactions between the minority-language-speaking parent and the child is often a crucial variable in determining the success of the OPOL approach in raising a child with active knowledge of more than one language.

Understanding child bilingual acquisition using parent and teacher reports

There is limited research regarding what levels of proficiency in each language should characterize the language behavior of bilingual children and the impact of language exposure or language use variables on bilingual performance. This study was designed to examine the extent to which years of exposure to a language(s), amount of language input at home and at school, and amount of exposure to reading and other literacy activities in a language(s) relate to observed bilingual performance in young children, as obtained from parent and teacher reports. A secondary goal was to determine the extent to which parents or teachers could assist in determining language status by examining relationships between their ratings of the child's use and proficiency in the two languages and the child's grammatical performance. Fifty-seven children and their families were sampled from second grade classes of a large school district serving primarily low-income families in southern California. Multiple regression analyses for each language indicated that amount of Spanish input at home was a significant predictor of grammatical performance in that language. These input effects did not hold for English. Although there were some crosslinguistic differences, parent and teacher ratings of use and proficiency correlated with the child's grammatical performance in the target language. The findings suggest that parent and teacher estimates may be useful to determine bilingual status.