Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32047453›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2019

Speech Sound Disorders in Children: An Articulatory Phonology Perspective.

Aravind Kumar Namasivayam, Deirdre Coleman, Aisling O'Dwyer, Pascal van Lieshout

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Multidomain Developmental Indicators in 4- to 9-Year-Old Children with Oral Motor and Speech Sound Disorders.Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP) · 2026
    Article
  3. Chewing efficiency in children with motor speech disorders.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Tongue Shape Complexity in Children With and Without Speech Sound Disorders.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Aravind Kumar NamasivayamOral Dynamics Laboratory, Department of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Deirdre ColemanOral Dynamics Laboratory, Department of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Aisling O'DwyerOral Dynamics Laboratory, Department of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Pascal van LieshoutOral Dynamics Laboratory, Department of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Speech Sound Disorders (SSDs) is a generic term used to describe a range of difficulties producing speech sounds in children (McLeod and Baker, 2017). The foundations of clinical assessment, classification and intervention for children with SSD have been heavily influenced by psycholinguistic theory and procedures, which largely posit a firm boundary between phonological processes and phonetics/articulation (Shriberg, 2010). Thus, in many current SSD classification systems the complex relationships between the etiology (distal), processing deficits (proximal) and the behavioral levels (speech symptoms) is under-specified (Terband et al., 2019a). It is critical to understand the complex interactions between these levels as they have implications for differential diagnosis and treatment planning (Terband et al., 2019a). There have been some theoretical attempts made towards understanding these interactions (e.g., McAllister Byun and Tessier, 2016) and characterizing speech patterns in children either solely as the product of speech motor performance limitations or purely as a consequence of phonological/grammatical competence has been challenged (Inkelas and Rose, 2007; McAllister Byun, 2012). In the present paper, we intend to reconcile the phonetic-phonology dichotomy and discuss the interconnectedness between these levels and the nature of SSDs using an alternative perspective based on the notion of an articulatory "gesture" within the broader concepts of the Articulatory Phonology model (AP; Browman and Goldstein, 1992). The articulatory "gesture" serves as a unit of phonological contrast and characterization of the resulting articulatory movements (Browman and Goldstein, 1992; van Lieshout and Goldstein, 2008). We present evidence supporting the notion of articulatory gestures at the level of speech production and as reflected in control processes in the brain and discuss how an articulatory "gesture"-based approach can account for articulatory behaviors in typical and disordered speech production (van Lieshout, 2004; Pouplier and van Lieshout, 2016). Specifically, we discuss how the AP model can provide an explanatory framework for understanding SSDs in children. Although other theories may be able to provide alternate explanations for some of the issues we will discuss, the AP framework in our view generates a unique scope that covers linguistic (phonology) and motor processes in a unified manner.

Indexed as

articulation and phonological disordersArticulatory Phonologychildhood apraxia of speech (CAS)Dynamical Systems TheoryDysarthriamotor speech developmentspeech motor controlspeech sound disorders (SSD)

Identifiers

PMID32047453
PMCPMC6997346

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.