Display options
Cite
Goldfield BA, Gencarella C, Fornari K. Understanding and Assessing Word Comprehension. Appl Psycholinguist. 2015;37(3):529-549doi: 10.1017/S0142716415000107.
Goldfield, B. A., Gencarella, C., & Fornari, K. (2016). Understanding and Assessing Word Comprehension. Applied psycholinguistics, 37(3), 529-549. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000107
Goldfield, Beverly A, et al. "Understanding and Assessing Word Comprehension." Applied psycholinguistics vol. 37,3 (2016): 529-549. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000107
Goldfield BA, Gencarella C, Fornari K. Understanding and Assessing Word Comprehension. Appl Psycholinguist. 2016 May;37(3):529-549. doi: 10.1017/S0142716415000107. Epub 2015 Apr 10. PMID: 28490826; PMCID: PMC5421562.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Appl Psycholinguist. 2016 May;37(3):529-549. doi: 10.1017/S0142716415000107. Epub 2015 Apr 10.

Understanding and Assessing Word Comprehension.

Applied psycholinguistics

Beverly A Goldfield, Christina Gencarella, Kevin Fornari

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Rhode Island College.

PMID: 28490826 PMCID: PMC5421562 DOI: 10.1017/S0142716415000107

Abstract

The Intermodal Preferential Looking (IPL) task was developed to assess comprehension in infants and toddlers. We extend this methodology to examine word comprehension in preschool children using two measures: proportion of looking time to target (LTT) and longest look (LL) to target. Children (3-6 years) were tested with the IPL for comprehension of nouns, verbs, and adjectives. Both LTT and LL scores showed that, across all ages, eye gaze to the target word increased from baseline to test; there were higher scores for nouns compared to verbs and adjectives. We also compare IPL performance to scores on a standardized test of receptive vocabulary (PPVT-4). Correlations with PPVT-4 scores were stronger for LTT than LL measures. The IPL may provide an alternative method for assessing word comprehension in preschool children with behavioral limitations.

References

  1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Feb 28;109(9):3253-8 - PubMed
  2. Dev Psychol. 1999 Jul;35(4):1072-8 - PubMed
  3. Dev Sci. 2008 Jul;11(4):525-30 - PubMed
  4. J Child Lang. 1979 Jun;6(2):183-200 - PubMed
  5. Cognition. 2005 May;96(1):B23-32 - PubMed
  6. Cognition. 2008 Sep;108(3):896-904 - PubMed
  7. Psychol Res. 2011 Jan;75(1):35-42 - PubMed
  8. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 1994;59(5):1-173; discussion 174-85 - PubMed
  9. Dev Psychol. 2006 Jan;42(1):98-116 - PubMed
  10. Child Dev. 1998 Apr;69(2):309-20 - PubMed
  11. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2011 Jun;137(2):151-71 - PubMed
  12. J Autism Dev Disord. 1994 Feb;24(1):99-107 - PubMed
  13. Child Dev. 1981 Sep;52(3):798-903 - PubMed
  14. J Child Lang. 1995 Feb;22(1):1-18 - PubMed
  15. J Child Lang. 1987 Feb;14(1):23-45 - PubMed
  16. Front Psychol. 2014 May 26;5:490 - PubMed
  17. Child Dev. 2007 Mar-Apr;78(2):542-57 - PubMed
  18. Science. 1995 Jun 16;268(5217):1632-4 - PubMed
  19. J Child Lang. 2009 Sep;36(4):895-908 - PubMed
  20. J Child Lang. 2007 Nov;34(4):701-24 - PubMed
  21. Child Dev. 2001 Jul-Aug;72(4):1003-15 - PubMed
  22. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2010 Nov-Dec;45(6):681-90 - PubMed
  23. Child Dev. 2005 Jan-Feb;76(1):87-96 - PubMed
  24. Adv Child Dev Behav. 2004;32:163-212 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support