Articulatory and segmental performance in children with and without speech disorder: A multiple case pilot study.
Janet Vuolo
PMID 35971981WHAT IT FOUND
Children with CAS showed high articulatory variability.
Rote imitation of simple nonwords increased variability in half the participants, including those with CAS. Accuracy did not improve. This suggests simple repetition without feedback may disrupt motor control rather than refine it.
Key findings
01Children with CAS exhibited the highest articulatory variability compared to peers with phonological disorder or typical development.
02Rote imitation of reduplicated nonwords increased articulatory variability in both children with CAS, as well as two children with PD and one with TD.
03Segmental accuracy remained low for children with CAS after five sessions, with no significant improvement in the practised condition.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Very small sample size (only two children with CAS). The two children with CAS missed Session 4 due to equipment failure and scheduling, meaning they had one less practice session than other participants. Children with CAS had below-average receptive language skills, which may have influenced their ability to learn the nonwords. The study used a specific type of minimal feedback (knowledge of results only on first correct attempt), which may not reflect typical clinical practice where more guidance is provided.
Declared interests
The author reports no conflicts of interest. The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health (N.I.H., Extramural).
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that rote practice of simple nonwords is an effective treatment for CAS. In this pilot, such practice increased articulatory variability in the children with CAS and did not improve their speech accuracy. The study design lacked the explicit feedback and teaching phases found in evidence-based treatments like ReST.