Speech Intervention Outcomes Associated With Word Lexicality and Intervention Intensity Purpose This study examined how lexical representations and intervention intensity affect phonological acquisition and generalization in children with speech sound disorders. Method Using a single-subject multiple baseline design, 24 children with speech sound disorders (3;6 to 6;10 [years;months]) were split into 3 word lexicality types targeting word-initial complex ... Research Article
Newly Published
Research Article  |   November 15, 2018
Speech Intervention Outcomes Associated With Word Lexicality and Intervention Intensity
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Alycia Cummings
    Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Idaho State University–Meridian
  • Janet Hallgrimson
    Department of Speech-Language Pathology, Northern Health Region Hospital, The Pas, Manitoba, Canada
  • Sarah Robinson
    Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks
  • Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.
    Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication. ×
  • Correspondence to Alycia Cummings: cummalyc@isu.edu
  • Editor-in-Chief: Shelley Gray
    Editor-in-Chief: Shelley Gray×
  • Editor: Ignatius Nip
    Editor: Ignatius Nip×
Article Information
Development / Attention, Memory & Executive Functions / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Newly Published / Research Article
Research Article   |   November 15, 2018
Speech Intervention Outcomes Associated With Word Lexicality and Intervention Intensity
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, Newly Published. doi:10.1044/2018_LSHSS-18-0026
History: Received February 7, 2018 , Revised May 1, 2018 , Accepted June 29, 2018
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, Newly Published. doi:10.1044/2018_LSHSS-18-0026
History: Received February 7, 2018; Revised May 1, 2018; Accepted June 29, 2018

Purpose This study examined how lexical representations and intervention intensity affect phonological acquisition and generalization in children with speech sound disorders.

Method Using a single-subject multiple baseline design, 24 children with speech sound disorders (3;6 to 6;10 [years;months]) were split into 3 word lexicality types targeting word-initial complex singleton phonemes: /ɹ l ʧ θ/. Specifically, academic vocabulary words, nonwords (NWs), and high-frequency (HF) words were contrasted. Intervention intensity was examined by comparing the performance of 12 children who completed eleven 50-min sessions (4 children/word type) to the performance of 12 who completed 19 sessions (4 children/word type). Children's production accuracy of their treated phonemes and overall percent consonants correct values were used to measure phonological generalization via percentage accuracy scores and d scores.

Results All word lexicality conditions elicited phonological change, suggesting that academic vocabulary words, NWs, and HF words are viable intervention targets. Group mean averages were similarly high for the NWs and HF words, although children in the NW condition demonstrated more consistent phonological gains. Children who received 19 intervention sessions achieved 6 times more gains in treated sound accuracy than did children who received 11 sessions.

Conclusions Word lexicality did not significantly influence children's intervention outcomes. More intensive intervention, as characterized by the number sessions, resulted in greater phonological change than did a shorter intervention program. Intervention intensity outcomes should be considered when establishing best practices for speech intervention scheduling.

Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.7336055

Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Grant R15DC013359 and the National Center for Research Resources Grant C06RR022088 awarded to the first author. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The authors would like to thank Maria Fairfield, Steph Frey, Kristen Giesbrecht, Kristyne Hass, Brianna Jallo, Jessie Lancaster, Tara Lundmark, Abbi Machart, Anna Morris, Megan Nauman, Courtney Rowan, and Andrea Watkins for help with speech transcription. In addition, Kristen Giesbrecht provided manuscript suggestions regarding intervention intensity. The authors also thank Amy Hardy and Mary van Donsel for reading previous drafts of the article.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access