Nahid Hooshyar
nahidhooshyar@sbcglobal.net
|
|
Nahid Hooshyar nahidhooshyar@sbcglobal.net |
| Participants: | 40 |
| Type of Study: | clinical |
| Location: | USA |
| Media type: | some video |
| DOI: | doi:10.21415/T56K62 |
Hooshyar, N. (1985). Language interaction between mothers and their nonhandicapped children, mothers and their Down children, and mothers and their language-impaired children. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 4, 475–477.
Hooshyar, N. (1987). The relationship between maternal language parameters and the child’s language constancy and developmental condition. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 10, 321–324.
In accordance with TalkBank rules, any use of data from this corpus must be accompanied by at least one of the above references.
Other relevant publications include:
Ryder, N. B., & Westhoff, C. F. (1971). Reproduction in the United States in 1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sparrow, S., Balla, D., & Cichetti, D. (1984). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales: Interview edition. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
This directory contains files from Down syndrome children and their mothers collected by Nahid Hooshyar in the context of a project entitled “Language Interactions between Mothers and Their Nonhandicapped Children, Mothers and Their Down syndrome Children, and Mothers and Their Language-Impaired Children.” The data from the nonhandicapped and language-impaired children are not in CHILDES. The data were collected from 1984 to 1986 and contributed to the CHILDES system in 1988. They were originally formatted in SALT (Miller & Chapman, 1983), but were reformatted to CHAT by the SALTIN program.
The major goal of this study was to isolate and identify patterns occurring in language interactions between mothers and their nonhandicapped (NH), Down syndrome (DS), or language-impaired (LI) children. The study explored the nature of such language interac-tions and attempted to determine whether there were consistently recurring patterns within a group, and if so, whether these patterns were the same across groups. More specifically, this study was designed to investigate the following questions:
Three groups of mother–child dyads participated in this study: nonhandicapped chil-dren and their mothers, children with Down syndrome and their mothers, and children with language impairment and their mothers. Names of potential participants were obtained from a number of cooperating school systems and day-care centers in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex, the Down syndrome Guild, and the Callier Center for Communication Disorders of the University of Texas at Dallas. Mothers were mailed an introductory letter explaining the nature of the study and a parental consent form. The introductory letter was followed by telephone contact during which mothers were given more detailed information about the tasks and time involved in this study. Mothers were asked to volunteer if their children could produce at least 10 words but were not yet regularly producing multiword utterances. The final criterion for inclusion of a child in the study was the child’s level of linguistic development as measured by the mean length of utterance (MLU) as defined by Brown (1973). Only children with MLU between 1 and 3 were included in this study.
In order to ensure that children of the three groups were equal in their expressive and receptive language, the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS) (Sparrow, Balla, & Cichetti, 1984) was administered. Three to 5 days after the telephone contact, a member of the research team called each of the mothers to arrange an appointment for a home visit. During this visit, the same research assistant interviewed the mother using a family background and demographic characteristics questionnaire and the VABS. The purpose of this interview was to encourage communication, to allow the interviewer to study the attitudes of the mothers toward their child and to form other subjective observations useful in subsequent contacts with the mothers. The visit lasted between 3 to 4 hours. Although the purpose of the study was stated in the letter sent to the mothers, it was reiterated during the initial visit in the following format: “We are researchers at the University of Texas at Dallas and we would like to learn about the language development among three groups of children: nonhandicapped, Down syndrome, and language-impaired. We feel we will get a typical language sample if we observe children interacting with their mothers in their familiar environment. We would like you to carry on your daily activities as you ordinarily do.”
Videotaping sessions were conducted in the participants’ homes and were scheduled at the mothers’ convenience. Participants were videotaped while engaged in each of the three activities (playtime, story time, and mealtime) for approximately 20 minutes. All sessions were completed during one home visit that lasted 2 to 3 hours. In most of the sessions only the child and the mother were present. However, in about 25% of the cases there was another child or adult present also. Two to 3 weeks after the videotaping session, each mother was mailed a questionnaire to assess the effects of the videotaping and the presence of the observer on the mother and child behavior.
Mothers’ rating of their children’s social and adaptive behavior was assessed by the VABS survey form. This scale contains 297 items which measure adaptive behavior in four domains: (1) communication, (2) daily living skills, (3) socialization, and (4) motor skills. In interview form, it is designed to be used with parents of individuals aged zero to 18 years 11 months or of low-functioning adults. The scale was standardized on the performance of a representative national sample of handicapped and nonhandicapped individuals. Reported internal consistencies range from 0.89 to 0.98, and test–retest reliabilities range from 0.76 to 0.93.
For the purpose of this study, a detailed demographic characteristic and family back-ground questionnaire was developed. The questionnaire consisted of 65 items grouped into eight categories: identifying information, demographic information, marital status, source of financial support, occupation, number of children, child-care, health of the child, reading, TV viewing, physical environment, and experience outside of the home. Questions included such areas as birth order, educational attainment, employment, and marital history of the parents. A second questionnaire was developed consisting of an open-ended question asking mothers to describe their feelings and thoughts about the videotaping session and the observer.
The final sample consisted of 40 NH (21 female, 19 male), 31 DS (14 female, 17 male), and 21 LI (7 female, 14 male) children and their mothers. Only the data from the Down syndrome group is in the CHILDES database. Of the children with Down syndrome, the karyotype of 30 were diagnosed as Trisomy 21 and one as Translocation. The LI children were of normal intelligence with language or speech production problems including articulation problems attributed primarily to middle ear infection, cleft palate (surgically corrected), and nonspecified causes.
All participants were white, English-speaking, and middle-class, as defined by Hollingshead Index of Social Status. The table that follows presents the birth order of the children. All mothers were currently married, living with a spouse, and primary caregivers of their children. The mean age for the mothers of the NH children was 30.0 years (SD = 0.80; Range = 20 to 45 years) and the mean age for the mothers of the two other groups was 36.0 years (SD = 1.34 and Range = 20 to 46 years for mothers of DS children; SD = 0.94 and Range 20 to 45 years for mothers of LI children). The educational level ranged from high school to postgraduate education for mothers of NH children and from partial college preparation to B.A. or B.S. degree for the other two groups. The mean parity, as defined by Ryder and Westhoff (1971), was 1.81 for families with NH children, 3.09 for families with DS children, and 2.05 for families with LI children. The mean age for NH children was 26.75 months (SD = 4.24; Range = 16 to 35 months), for DS children it was 64.48 months (SD = 17.87; Range = 38 to 138 months), and for LI children it was 44.84 months (SD = 9.23; Range = 32 to 69 months). The mean MLU for NH children was 1.85 (SD = 0.61; Range = 1.07 to 2.98), for DS children it was 1.64 (SD = 0.63; Range = 1.01 to 2.95), and for LI children it was 1.98 (SD = 0.66; Range = 1.04 to 3.00).
The mean Adaptive Behavior Composite (ABC) score on the VABS for NH children was 37.60 (SD = 46.53; Range = 17 to 32), for DS it was 44.35 (SD = 17.33; Range = 18 to 75), and for LI it was 41.33 (SD = 10.05; Range = 21 to 64). The mean Expressive Communication on the VABS for NH children was 29.05 (SD = 8.73; Range = 13 to 53), for DS it was 38.00 (SD = 21.36; Range = 12 to 89), and for LI it was 36.00 (SD = 12.12; Range = 17 to 62). The mean Receptive communication on the VABS for NH children was 39.82 (SD = 9.54; Range = 18 to 47), for DS it was 53.41 (SD = 27.88; Range = 14 to 94), and for LI it was 46.52 (SD = 17.66; Range = 30 to 94). The NH children were functioning significantly above their chronological age (CA) in expressive and receptive communication (t= 2.48 and t = 9.2 with p = 0.02 and 0.001, respectively). Children with DS were significantly delayed in their adaptive behavior, expressive and receptive communication functioning (t = 8.06, 8.01, 4.53 with p < 0.001 for the three scores). For LI children, the mean ABC and expressive communication scores were significantly delayed (t = 2.22 and t = 3.67 with p = 0.04 and 0.002, respectively).
Each participant was videotaped during three different settings: playtime, story time, and mealtime. Only the playtime and story time transcripts are in the CHILDES database. The names of the files with playtime dialogs all begin with the letter “p” and the names of the files with storytime dialogs all begin with the letter “s.” The participant numbers, pseudonyms, ages in months, ages in years, dates of recordings (for the story files), and dates of birth are as follows:
| Code | Name | Months | Age | Date of Recording | Date of Birth
| 041 | Shally | 81 | 6;8.24 | 10-MAR-1985 | 16-JUN-1978
| 042 | John | 79(77) | 6;7.0 | 4-APR-1985 |
| 043 | Alicia | 86 | 7;6.0 | 30-MAR-1985 |
| 044 | Ruth | 37(38) | 3;1.0 | 18-APR-1985 |
| 045 | David | 107 | 8;11.0 | 17-MAY-1985 |
| 046 | Beverly | 55(46) | 4;7.0 |
| 047 | Jerald | 58 | 4;10.0 | 3-JUN-1985 |
| 048 | Robert | 41 | 3;5.0 | 14-JUN-1985 |
| 049 | Cheryl | 38 | 3;2.0 |
| 050 | Steve | 56 | 4;8.0 | 29-MAY-1985 |
| 051 | Mary | 95 | 7;10.0 | 4-JUN-1985 |
| 052 | Michael | 42 | 3;6.0 | 17-JUN-1985 | 16-DEC-1981
| 053 | Barton | 95 | 7;10.25 | 14-JUN-1985 | 20-JUL-1977
| 054 | Marilyn | 40 | 3;5.9 | 19-JUL-1985 | 10-FEB-1982
| 055 | Mark | 40 | 3;4.18 | 8-AUG-1985 | 21-MAR-1982
| 056 | Edward | 65 | 5;5.0 | 20-AUG-1985 | 20-MAR-1980
| 057 | Craig | 45 | 3;9.0 | 22-AUG-1985 |
| 058 | Kim | 102 | 9;4.0 |
| 059 | Taffie | 47 | 3;10.3 | 2-OCT-1985 | 30-DEC-1981
| 060 | Rick | 52 | 4;5.9 | 3-JAN-1986 | 25-AUG-1981
| 061 | Donald | 47 | 3;11.16 | 7-FEB-1986 | 19-FEB-1982
| 062 | Jack | 38 | 3;2.0 | 18-FEB-1986 |
| 063 | James | 138 | 11;6.0 | 14-APR-1986 |
| 064 | Barbara | 99 | 8;3.0 | 8-AUG-1986 |
| 065 | Adam | 108 | 9;5.0 | 7-AUG-1986 |
| 066 | Eileen | 120 | 9;11.0 | 13-AUG-1986 |
| 067 | George | 96 | 8;10.7 | 29-AUG-1986 | 22-OCT-1977
| 068 | Sandra | 108 | 9;7.10 | 23-OCT-1986 | 13-MAR-1977
| 069 | Jody | 108 |
| 070 | Ronald | 96 | 7;11.13 | 20-AUG-1986 | 7-SEP-1978
| 071 | Lynelle | 84 | 7;0.5 | 23-AUG-1986 | 18-AUG-1979
| |
Five research assistants participated in transcribing the videotaping. In order to have a uniform transcription, transcribers were trained to use SALT (Miller & Chapman, 1983) for preparing and marking the transcripts. Sample transcripts were jointly reviewed in conferences to clarify and answer questions about instructions. An utterance-by-utterance reliability of the transcription was estimated by having the transcribers independently transcribe 10 representative videotapes. Only after interrater agreement approached unity were the remaining videotapes transcribed. All transcriptions were made in ordinary En-glish orthography with phonetic notation used in cases where an English word could not be identified. Normal English punctuation was used to denote intonation patterns, to make the meaning of a sentence clear, or to indicate the pauses and stops that the speaker made in speaking. The mood of each utterance was identified primarily on the basis of intonation and secondarily on the basis of structural features. For example, declarative sentences that ended in rising intonation were coded as interrogative mood. Seven assistants entered the transcribed records into the computer using WordStar. Finally, observers checked the transcripts of their own videotaping sessions to verify the accuracy and add necessary contextual information. The final product was a complete record of verbal and behavioral events and the context in which these occurred. In 1988, the SALT files were converted to CHAT format, using the SALTIN program.
Every utterance was coded for its overall speech act function and specific value. The functions and their specific values were as follows:
| Variable | NH Mean | NH SD | DS Mean | DS SD | LI Mean | LI SD
| Age | 26.75 | 4.24 | 64.48 | 17.87 | 44.84 | 9.23
| MLU | 1.85 | 0.61 | 1.64 | 0.63 | 1.98 | 0.66
| ABC | 37.60 | 46.53 | 44.35 | 17.33 | 41.33 | 10.05
| Exp.Comm | 29.05 | 8.73 | 38.00 | 21.36 | 36.00 | 12.12
| Rec.Comm | 39.82 | 9.54 | 53.41 | 27.88 | 46.52 | 17.66
| |