Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32692599›Full record

ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2020

After Initial Retrieval Practice, More Retrieval Produces Better Retention Than More Study in the Word Learning of Children With Developmental Language Disorder.

Laurence B Leonard, Patricia Deevy, Jeffrey D Karpicke, Sharon L Christ, Justin B Kueser

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laurence B LeonardPurdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Patricia DeevyPurdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Jeffrey D KarpickePurdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Sharon L ChristPurdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Justin B KueserPurdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Google (United States) · US

Funding

Retrieval-Based Word Learning in Specific Language ImpairmentR01DC014708 · NIDCD · PURDUE UNIVERSITY · PI Jeffrey Karpicke · 2016 to 2026
$5.8M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014708
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose Children with developmental language disorder (DLD) often have difficulty with word learning. Recent studies have shown that incorporating retrieval practice provides a significant benefit to this learning. However, we have not yet discovered the best balance between the amount of retrieval and the amount of study (hearing the word in the presence of the referent) that is provided. In this investigation, we compared a word learning procedure using more retrieval and less study with a procedure that used more study and less retrieval. Method Participants were 13 children with DLD and 13 same-age peers with typical language development (TD). Both groups ranged in age from 4 to 6 years. The children learned two sets of novel words, with each set taught in two sessions. During an initial criterion period, the children had the opportunity to retrieve all of the words. Following this period, the words were either retrieved without further study or studied without additional retrieval. Recall and recognition testing immediately followed the second learning session and was repeated 1 week later. Testing assessed the children's retention of both the word forms and their meanings. Results Better recall both immediately after learning and after 1 week was seen for the more retrieval/less study condition. This was seen for both groups of children for word form recall and for children with DLD for meaning. Group differences were not found. Conclusion This study served as a stringent test of the benefits of retrieval to children's word learning. Continued retrieval after initial retrieval practice appeared to be helpful even when further study was discontinued and when the comparison study condition had also provided retrieval practice in the initial stages. Further refinement of retrieval procedures might lead to the development of useful clinical tools to promote word learning.

Indexed as

Language Development DisordersChildChild, PreschoolHumansLanguage DevelopmentLanguage TestsMental RecallVerbal Learning

Identifiers

PMID32692599
PMCPMC7872731
OpenAlexW3045417836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.