ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Measurement of Lexical Diversity in Children's Spoken Language: Computational and Conceptual Considerations.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Academic achievement map: a clear cognitive route and a promising motor path.Jornal de pediatria · 2026Article
- Developmental Sentence Scoring for Preschool Language Sample Analysis: A Psychometric Update.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2026Article
- A methodological protocol for multimodal profiling of conversational abilities in mandarin-speaking children with and without developmental language disorder.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Supporting Oral Language Development in Preschool Children Through Instructional Scaffolding During Drawing Activity: A Qualitative Case Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Multiphase Structured Latent Curve Models for Count Response Data: A Re-Analysis of the Acquisition of Morphology in English.Psychometrika · 2025Article
- Should We Stop Using Lexical Diversity Measures in Children's Language Sample Analysis?American journal of speech-language pathology · 2024Article
- Open Brain AI and language assessment.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Stalling for Time: Stall, Revision, and Stuttering-Like Disfluencies Reflect Language Factors in the Speech of Young Children.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023Article
- Assessment and Therapy Goal Planning Using Free Computerized Language Analysis Software.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2023Article
- Establishing Norm of Connected Speech Measures for Descriptive Discourses in Cantonese-Speaking Adults.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Type-Token Ratio (TTR), given its relatively simple hand computation, is one of the few LSA measures calculated by clinicians in everyday practice. However, it has significant well-documented shortcomings; these include instability as a function of sample size, and absence of clear developmental profiles over early childhood. A variety of alternative measures of lexical diversity have been proposed; some, such as Number of Different Words/100 (NDW) can also be computed by hand. However, others, such as Vocabulary Diversity (VocD) and the Moving Average Type Token Ratio (MATTR) rely on complex resampling algorithms that cannot be conducted by hand. To date, no large-scale study of all four measures has evaluated how well any capture typical developmental trends over early childhood, or whether any reliably distinguish typical from atypical profiles of expressive child language ability. Materials and Methods: We conducted linear and non-linear regression analyses for TTR, NDW, VocD, and MATTR scores for samples taken from 946 corpora from typically developing preschool children (ages 2-6 years), engaged in adult-child toy play, from the Child Language Data Exchange System (CHILDES). These were contrasted with 504 samples from children known to have delayed expressive language skills (total Results: Only VocD showed significantly different mean scores between the typically -developing children and delayed developing children group. Using TTR would actually misdiagnose typical children and miss children with known language impairment. However, computation of VocD as a function of toy interactions was significant and emerges as a further caution in use of lexical diversity as a valid proxy index of children's expressive vocabulary skill. Discussion: This large scale statistical comparison of computer-implemented algorithms for expressive lexical profiles in young children with traditional, hand-calculated measures showed that only VocD met criteria for evidence-based use in LSA. However, VocD was impacted by sample elicitation context, suggesting that non-linguistic factors, such as engagement with elicitation props, contaminate estimates of spoken lexical skill in young children. Implications and suggested directions are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.