Working memory training in children with developmental language disorder: Effects on complex syntax in narratives.
Hélène Delage, Emily Stanford, Clara Baratti and 1 others
PMID 36684683WHAT IT FOUND
Working memory training did not significantly improve complex syntax in children's spontaneous storytelling when compared within groups.
However, the trained group used more embedded clauses than the control group at post-test, though this difference was small and the study was underpowered.
Key findings
01No language measure showed significant progression between pre- and post-test for either the working memory training group or the control group.
02At post-test, the working memory training group produced a significantly higher rate of embedding (15.9%) compared to the control group (9.9%).
03Children with DLD produced significantly fewer embedded clauses and more errors in complex sentences than typically developing children.
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
The study was underpowered with only 20 children in the training group and 19 in the control group. There was no significant improvement in the trained group when comparing their own pre- and post-test scores. The positive result (higher embedding in the training group at post-test) was partly driven by a significant decrease in embedding in the control group, which was unexpected. The study lacked a follow-up assessment to determine if any effects persisted after the training ended. The data collection methods differed between the DLD groups (storytelling from a picture book) and the typically developing comparison group (conversation about a movie or book), which may affect comparability.
Declared interests
The study was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation. No other conflicts of interest were declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the difference between the training and control groups as proof that working memory training improves syntax. The training group did not significantly improve on their own from pre- to post-test, and the apparent advantage at post-test was partly because the control group's performance worsened.