ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2026
Responses and Nonresponses in a Bound Morpheme Elicitation Task by Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2026. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to explore the rates of bound morpheme production at two time points (T1 and T2) by deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) preschoolers and their typically hearing (TH) peers. We further sought to describe the rates and types of unscorable responses children produced.
methodSixty-four DHH preschoolers and 66 TH preschoolers participated as part of a larger, ongoing longitudinal study. Children were given the Test of Early Grammatical Impairment (TEGI) screener, which elicits productions of the third-person singular present and past tense. TEGI screeners were given twice, spaced 6 months apart.
resultsTH children produced significantly more singular present-tense and regular past-tense morphemes than cochlear implant (CI)-using children at both time points; hearing aid-using children were not significantly different from TH or CI users. All children were more accurate with the regular past tense at T2 than at T1. No interactions were significant. Examining the types of unscorable responses indicated that the DHH children were more likely to echo the prompt than TH children, particularly at T1.
conclusionsAssessments that elicit bound morpheme productions may not best capture DHH children's morphological sensitivity. When language samples are not feasible, receptive tasks may be a good alternative to probe children's knowledge.
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.