ArticleResearch square2023
Assessing receptive verb knowledge in late talkers and autistic children: Advances and cautionary tales.
Article in Research square, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Using eye-tracking, we assessed the receptive verb vocabularies of late talkers and typically developing children (Experiment 1) and autistic preschoolers (Experiment 2). We evaluated how many verbs participants knew and how quickly they processed the linguistic prompt. Method: Participants previewed two dynamic scenes side-by-side (e.g., "stretching" and "clapping") and were then prompted to find the target verb. Children's eye gaze behaviors were operationalized using established approaches in the field with modifications in consideration for the type of stimuli (dynamic scenes versus static images) and the populations included. Accuracy was calculated as a proportion of time spent looking to the target, and linguistic processing was operationalized as latency of children's first look to the target. Results: In Experiment 1, there were no group differences in the proportion of verbs known, but late talkers required longer to demonstrate their knowledge than typically developing children. Latency was predicted by age but not language abilities. In Experiment 2, autistic children's accuracy and latency were both predicted by receptive language abilities. Conclusion: Eye gaze can be used to assess receptive verb vocabulary in a variety of populations, but in operationalizing gaze behavior, we must account for between- and within-group differences. Bootstrapped cluster-permutation analysis is one way to create individualized measures of children's gaze behavior, but more research is warranted using an individual differences approach with this type of analysis. Finally, latency may not be a valid measure for dynamic scene stimuli for children under three years old.
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.