Auditory, visual, and auditory-visual processing performance in typically developing children: Modality independence versus dependence

2015 ◽  
Vol 137 (2) ◽  
pp. 923-934
Author(s):  
Roshni Pillai ◽  
Asha Yathiraj
Keyword(s):  
Visual Processing ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Typically Developing Children

scholarly journals A Synoptic and Theoretical Account of Character (Digits and Capital Letters) Reversal in Writings by Typically Developing Children

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Paul Fischer ◽  
Christophe Luxembourger
Keyword(s):  
Educational Psychology ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Typically Developing Children ◽  
Left Hand ◽  
Comprehensive Theory ◽  
Early Visual Processing ◽  
Mirror Generalization ◽  
Hand Writing ◽  
Neuropsychological Findings

Reversing characters (digits and letters) when writing, and complete mirror writing, raise one of the oldest and most mysterious questions in developmental and educational psychology: Why do five-year-old children write symbols (e.g., ꓱ for E) they have neither learnt nor seen? Attempts to draw up a complete explanatory theory of character reversal in writings by typically developing children were long hindered by the existence of a seemingly satisfactory explanation (left-hand writing), the failure to bring together research in neuropsychology and educational psychology, and the failure to consider the shape and structure of the characters. The present paper remedies this situation by describing a new, comprehensive theory based on recent neuropsychological findings and extensive empirical observations. The theory assumes that a character’s orientation, detected in the early visual processing area, is deleted (or made inaccessible) by the mirror generalization process during transfer to memory. Consequently, there is a period, usually around age five, during which children have representations of the characters’ shapes but not their orientations. Hence, when asked to write a character, children have to improvise its orientation, and the orientation they choose (implicitly, non-consciously) is often derived from the writing direction in their culture.

scholarly journals Higher Visual Function Deficits in Children With Cerebral Visual Impairment and Good Visual Acuity

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arvind Chandna ◽  
Saeideh Ghahghaei ◽  
Susan Foster ◽  
Ram Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Brain Development ◽  
Visual Impairment ◽  
Brain Damage ◽  
Visual Function ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Typically Developing Children ◽  
Good Visual Acuity ◽  
Cerebral Visual Impairment

In clinical practice Cerebral Visual Impairment (CVI) is typically diagnosed by observation of abnormal visually guided behaviors which indicate higher visual function deficits (HVFDs) suggesting abnormal brain development or brain damage in a child with a suitable clinical history. HVFDs can occur even in the presence of good visual acuity and may remain undiagnosed because the good visual acuity does not prompt further investigation. This leads to a lack of understanding of the child’s visual perceptual difficulties. In a prospective study, we determined the spectrum of HVFDs in a group of children with history suggestive of brain damage or disruption of brain development and an independent diagnosis of CVI in comparison with typically developing children with a structured 51 question inventory, the Higher Visual Function Question Inventory (HVFQI-51) adapted from the Cerebral Vision Impairment Inventory, CVI-I. Here, we show that the HVFQI-51 can detect a range of HVFDs in children with CVI with good visual acuity and clearly distinguishes these children from typically developing children. HVFDs in our study group could mostly be attributed to dorsal stream visual processing dysfunction though the spectrum varied between children. We report on the inclusion of the “not applicable” response option in analysis providing a picture of HVFDs more in tune with the overall disability of each child. We also propose a subset of 11 questions (Top-11) which discriminate between children with CVI vs. behaviors seen in typical children: this provides both a potential screening tool for initial assessment of HVFDs and a measure of CVI-related impairment, and needs further validation in a secondary independent sample.

Age Norms for Auditory-Perceptual Neurophonetic Parameters: A Prerequisite for the Assessment of Childhood Dysarthria

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 1071-1082
Author(s):  
Theresa Schölderle ◽  
Elisabet Haas ◽  
Wolfram Ziegler
Keyword(s):  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Developmental Trajectories ◽  
Voice Quality ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Typically Developing Children ◽  
Age Norms ◽  
Elementary School Age ◽  
Speech Characteristics ◽  
Substantial Progress ◽  
Computer Based

Purpose The aim of this study was to collect auditory-perceptual data on established symptom categories of dysarthria from typically developing children between 3 and 9 years of age, for the purpose of creating age norms for dysarthria assessment. Method One hundred forty-four typically developing children (3;0–9;11 [years;months], 72 girls and 72 boys) participated. We used a computer-based game specifically designed for this study to elicit sentence repetitions and spontaneous speech samples. Speech recordings were analyzed using the auditory-perceptual criteria of the Bogenhausen Dysarthria Scales, a standardized German assessment tool for dysarthria in adults. The Bogenhausen Dysarthria Scales (scales and features) cover clinically relevant dimensions of speech and allow for an evaluation of well-established symptom categories of dysarthria. Results The typically developing children exhibited a number of speech characteristics overlapping with established symptom categories of dysarthria (e.g., breathy voice, frequent inspirations, reduced articulatory precision, decreased articulation rate). Substantial progress was observed between 3 and 9 years of age, but with different developmental trajectories across different dimensions. In several areas (e.g., respiration, voice quality), 9-year-olds still presented with salient developmental speech characteristics, while in other dimensions (e.g., prosodic modulation), features typically associated with dysarthria occurred only exceptionally, even in the 3-year-olds. Conclusions The acquisition of speech motor functions is a prolonged process not yet completed with 9 years. Various developmental influences (e.g., anatomic–physiological changes) shape children's speech specifically. Our findings are a first step toward establishing auditory-perceptual norms for dysarthria in children of kindergarten and elementary school age. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12133380

Clash of signs: Putting bilingualism back into language evolution

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Samuel
Keyword(s):  
Language Evolution ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Alarm Calls ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Typically Developing Children ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
The Real ◽  
Multiple Languages

Research and thinking into the cognitive aspects of language evolution has usually attempted to account for how the capacity for learning even one modern human language developed. Bilingualism has perhaps been thought of as something to think about only once the ‘real’ puzzle of monolingualism is solved, but this would assume in turn (and without evidence) that bilingualism evolved after monolingualism. All typically-developing children (and adults) are capable of learning multiple languages, and the majority of modern humans are at least bilingual. In this paper I ask whether by skipping bilingualism out of language evolution we have missed a trick. I propose that exposure to synonymous signs, such as food and alarm calls, are a necessary precondition for the abstracting away of sound from referent. In support of this possibility is evidence that modern day bilingual children are better at breaking this ‘word magic’ spell. More generally, language evolution should be viewed through the lens of bilingualism, as this is the end state we are attempting to explain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document