View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Associative Lexical Relationships in Children with Down Syndrome

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Associative Lexical Relationships in Children with Down Syndrome
Language: English
Authors: Barrón-Martínez, Julia B., Arias-Trejo, Natalia, Salvador-Cruz, Judith
Source: International Journal of Disability, Development and Education. 2022 69(2):510-522.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 13
Publication Date: 2022
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Down Syndrome, Language Acquisition, Language Skills, Young Children, Association (Psychology), Visual Stimuli, Auditory Stimuli, Language Processing, Foreign Countries, Measures (Individuals), Associative Learning
Geographic Terms: Mexico (Mexico City)
Assessment and Survey Identifiers: MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory
DOI: 10.1080/1034912X.2020.1726298
ISSN: 1034-912X
1465-346X
Abstract: From the second year of life, children with typical development (TD) demonstrate the ability to form word-word relations. However, this ability has received little attention in children with Down syndrome (DS). We investigated their ability to establish associative relationships between words that tend to occur in the same context. Two groups of children (TD and DS) matched by sex and mental age (mean 3.80 years) participated in a preferential looking test. A priming task using an eye-tracking technique in ten trials introduced associatively related versus unrelated word pairs. Participants in both groups were asked to find a target image (e.g. hen) when they heard an associative prime that was related (e.g. egg) or unrelated (e.g. door), and the mean proportion of target looking was then calculated. Both groups showed an associative priming effect. The results suggest that people with DS possess a lexical organisation. This study represents a first step in understanding lexical networks, an important factor in language processing, in people with DS, which could be used to design interventions or educational strategies for language therapy.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2022
Accession Number: EJ1344140
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGfNBCUIj0hn_KVfEerTaAyAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDIEu1nVeO1Zd5UHTlAIBEICBm2YtQMv2OKzqOmF_Bdp8tObZB76o9zjDaxMJw-w3gE_pMl1yDYkujAXS45SMF7LJhF9ZsehTuiW-x6tEXJ-4pz9aERWalg3c-emt2RVdU5Lx77au5gXxF7QRID29ee3QoNEJ0JBJ8PQSHc-PaoLAVqwWKkjqIMqGHLSwIC-xmjZcsIWCt3bgATfzh0Q3K7VSGD6hqAs1OuBhg8da
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0156218232;54q01mar.22;2022Apr12.03:40;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0156218232-1">Associative Lexical Relationships in Children with Down Syndrome </title> <p>From the second year of life, children with typical development (TD) demonstrate the ability to form word-word relations. However, this ability has received little attention in children with Down syndrome (DS). We investigated their ability to establish associative relationships between words that tend to occur in the same context. Two groups of children (TD and DS) matched by sex and mental age (mean 3.80 years) participated in a preferential looking test. A priming task using an eye-tracking technique in ten trials introduced associatively related versus unrelated word pairs. Participants in both groups were asked to find a target image (e.g. hen) when they heard an associative prime that was related (e.g. egg) or unrelated (e.g. door), and the mean proportion of target looking was then calculated. Both groups showed an associative priming effect. The results suggest that people with DS possess a lexical organisation. This study represents a first step in understanding lexical networks, an important factor in language processing, in people with DS, which could be used to design interventions or educational strategies for language therapy.</p> <p>Keywords: Associative relationships; Down Syndrome; eye-tracking task; lexical organisation; priming</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Down syndrome (DS) is the most common biological cause of intellectual disability (Nadal & Estivill, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref1">33</reflink>]). In Mexico, the incidence is 1 per 1,000 live births (Secretaría de Salud, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref2">40</reflink>]). DS is characterised by a dissociation between chronological age (CA) and mental age (MA), a dissociation that tends to increase with CA (Facon, Grubar, & Gardez, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref3">17</reflink>]).</p> <p>People with DS have particular difficulty in language production (Abbeduto et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref4">2</reflink>]; Chapman, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref5">10</reflink>]). Studies have demonstrated that this population shows poorer performance in lexical production than TD children of the same MA (Chapman, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref6">9</reflink>]; Galeote, Sebastián, Checa, Rey, & Soto, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref7">19</reflink>]; Katsarou & Andreou, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref8">23</reflink>]; Næss, Halaas Lyster, Hulme, & Melby-Lervag, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref9">34</reflink>]). In lexical comprehension, however, people with DS show a performance similar to that of their TD peers.</p> <p>During early childhood, DS and TD infants begin learning new words and incorporating them into their vocabularies (Abbeduto, Warren, & Conners, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref10">1</reflink>]; Hoff & Naigles, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref11">22</reflink>]); it is thus necessary to explore how these words are organised and structured for efficient language processing (Ferrand & New, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref12">18</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-3">Lexical Organisation</hd> <p>Various theoretical approaches have been put forward to understanding the bases of the human lexical network. Ongoing studies are examining its organisation around concepts, meanings, and different lexical attributes: semantic features (related to taxonomy) and associative features (related to context), among others. Some of the most important theoretical perspectives supporting the theory of lexical organisation are the retrieval theory of priming in memory (Ratcliff & McKoon, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref13">36</reflink>]), the spreading-activation model (Collins & Loftus, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref14">12</reflink>]), and the distributed connectionist model (Dell, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref15">14</reflink>]; Elman, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref16">16</reflink>]; McClelland & Rogers, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref17">31</reflink>]). The latter proposes the organisation of words as a neural network whose functioning is distributed and parallel. This network is trained through experience of the world based on the information contained in concepts and their features (McClelland & Rogers, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref18">31</reflink>]). In the network of the distributed connectionist model these concepts are represented not as symbolic units, but as a specific activation pattern of a large number of processing units, where similar concepts are represented by similar activation patterns. Each node can represent the coding of a particular semantic or associative trait that can be part of various concepts. In TD adults, the organisation of the lexical system was first explored by Meyer and Schvaneveldt ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref19">32</reflink>]) using a lexical-decision task, where a participant needs to make a decision about whether a string of letters matches a real word. They found that adults could read a target word (e.g. dog) more quickly when it was preceded by a related prime (e.g. cat) than when it was preceded by an unrelated prime (e.g. chair); they called this phenomenon the priming effect. With the aim of exploring the lexical organisation in early stages, subsequent researchers (Arias-Trejo & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref20">4</reflink>]; Mani & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref21">29</reflink>]; Styles & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref22">43</reflink>]) have created experimental adaptations of the priming task, based on the use of preferential looking paradigms (Golinkoff & Hirsch-Pasek, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref23">21</reflink>]), where looking times at target and distractor images are evaluated when preceded by related or unrelated words, and where children are expected to show more attention to the related words. Different methodological parameters have been employed to analyse automatic priming effects in studies with TD adults and children, including the prime-target interval inter-stimulus (ISI), defined as the time between the offset of the prime word and the onset of the target, and the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), the time elapsed between the onset of the visual stimulus and the onset of the target word (Lucas, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref24">27</reflink>]; Rosa & Perea, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref25">37</reflink>]).</p> <p>The organisation of the lexical system in TD children has been explored through the presentation of lexical relationships. These include semantic/taxonomic relationships, the sharing of categorical features or meaning (e.g. dog-elephant); associative/thematic relationships, meaning contextual or functional co-occurrence (e.g. dog-bone); and combined links (e.g. dog-cat). Several studies with TD children report priming effects during the second year of life: at 21 months (Arias-Trejo & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref26">4</reflink>]) and at 24 months (Styles & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref27">43</reflink>]), with words related on both the taxonomic and associative levels. Arias-Trejo and Plunkett ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref28">4</reflink>]) presented combined related words (e.g. sheep-cow, associatively and semantically related) and unrelated words (e.g. sheep-car) to 21- and 18-month-old children and measured their looking time at two images (target-distractor). They found that the 21- but not the 18-month-olds showed greater visual attention to related images than to unrelated ones. These results were one of the first demonstrations that infants begin to organise their lexicons based on combined associative-semantic relations. However, in a head-turn preference with two lists of spoken words, Delle Luche, Durrant, Floccia, and Plunkett ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref29">15</reflink>]) found that at 18 months of age, infants spent more time listening to a list of taxonomically-related words (e.g. lists of animals or parts of the body) than to one with mixed words (e.g. clothes and food items). Their results suggest that infants extract the meaning of spoken words and are sensitive to the semantic relationships between words.</p> <p>In another type of study, Lucariello and Nelson ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref30">26</reflink>]) found that in a cue-recall task with two lists of words (taxonomic and associative relations), 3- to 4-year-old TD children showed significantly better memory and organisation with an associative than with a taxonomic relationship. The authors concluded that associative relationships (e.g. egg-hen) predominate in the lexicon over the categories grouped as taxonomic (e.g. duck-hen) because the words with associative links share a common space, function, or context.</p> <p>To our knowledge, there are very few studies about the ability of children with DS to organise words by means of lexical relationships, either at the comprehension or production level. Nash and Snowling ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref31">35</reflink>]) employed a semantic verbal fluency task to examine word organisation in children with DS and TD matched by verbal MA (mean 7.4 years). Participants had to produce words in a semantic category (animals or food) within 60 seconds. The results showed that in general those with DS produced fewer words than TD children. However, the two groups produced similar numbers of subcategories (e.g. in the food category, subcategories such as fruit, meat, and fast food). These results suggest that, although the performance of children with DS is below that of their TD counterparts, the organisation of linguistic representations in children with DS is as rich and extensive as that of TD children. The reduced performance in the DS population may be due to their limited recovery strategies, as well as their deficit in executive functioning.</p> <p>In another study, Smith and Jarrold ([<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref32">41</reflink>]) explored the effects on comprehension of grouping, semantic relationship, and imagery in children with DS and TD matched by verbal mental age (mean 8 years). Participants were presented with words on a screen in three different conditions: 1) grouped (with manipulation of their perceptual separation) and non-grouped; 2) semantically related and non-related (in pairs, e.g. dog and bone); and 3) verbal-written and verbal-visual presentation (written words and their visual referents). The number of words recalled was measured in each condition. The results showed that both groups of participants benefited significantly from each of the three conditions because they recalled a greater number of words. A remarkable fact is that the contextual occurrence of the semantically related words, used in condition 2, is a strategy that allows participants with DS to improve their performance.</p> <p>A recent study by Laws et al. ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref33">25</reflink>]) investigated the ability of children with DS and TD, matched by verbal mental age (mean 4 years), to relate words at the comprehension level through the Baby and Prat Test. This test contained 35 trials; in each, the participant was shown a stimulus image (e.g. a camel) and asked to select a related image from a set of four options (e.g. a cactus [the target], a tree, a sunflower, and a rose). The DS group had fewer correct responses than their TD counterparts. Although this difference between the groups may be the consequence of cognitive demands in the task, the relationships used in the Camel and Cactus Test included diverse types of associations, including analogies (e.g. snake-tortoise), categories (e.g. eagle-owl), and general knowledge (e.g. arrow-Robin Hood), which could have confused DS children.</p> <p>These three studies (Laws et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref34">25</reflink>]; Nash & Snowling, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref35">35</reflink>]; Smith & Jarrold, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref36">41</reflink>]) are not fully comparable because of their methodological differences, the differing ages of the participants, and the lexical level explored (comprehension versus production). With respect to the lexical level, the use of a preferential-looking priming task using an eye-tracker is ideal for testing DS children for comprehension, as this type of task does not penalise their oral production deficits.</p> <p>Although lexical organisation has been explored in these studies mainly at a semantic level, they highlight the possibility of taking into account the contextual co-occurrence of the words (e.g. egg-chicken), as we propose in the current study: that is, the associative benefits obtained through experience with the world, beyond the organisation of concepts and their characteristics, as argued by the distributed models (McClelland & Rogers, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref37">31</reflink>]). Empirically, the ability to link words has been associated with the efficient processing of language in TD children (Mani & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref38">30</reflink>]) and TD adults (Ferrand & New, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref39">18</reflink>]), and it constitutes an important part of the development of the lexical system.</p> <p>The current study is a first step towards understanding how, despite significant problems in language production, people with DS might form a lexical system through the establishment of some types of relations among words. Its main objective is to describe the lexical organisation in children with Down syndrome, in particular their ability to establish associative relationships (words that tend to occur in the same context). Based on the studies described, people with DS, like their TD counterparts, should show greater sensitivity towards associatively related pairs of words than to unrelated pairs. They should show greater visual preference for target words that share associative links with a previously given prime (e.g. egg-hen) than for target words that do not share a link with the prime (e.g. door-hen). That is, they could benefit from the contextual experience, from the referents and words,that they obtain through the surrounding world. A group of TD children, matched by MA and sex, was also evaluated to compare the results of the experimental DS group with a typical condition of development.</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-4">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0156218232-5">Participants</hd> <p>Two groups of 26 children each were included in a cross-sectional study: an experimental group with DS (15 boys and 11 girls) and a control group with TD (15 boys and 11 girls), matched by mental age (MA) and sex. The DS group had a mean MA of 3.80 years (<emph>SD </emph>= 1.27) and a mean chronological age (CA) of 11.18 years (<emph>SD </emph>= 6.07); the TD group had a mean MA of 3.87 years (<emph>SD </emph>= 1.38) and a mean CA of 3.72 years (<emph>SD </emph>= 1.28). The data for 6 children from the DS group were excluded because they failed to pay attention in more than 50% of the trials (<emph>n</emph> = 3) or did not fulfill the inclusion criteria (<emph>n</emph> = 3); data for one child from the TD group were excluded due to lack of attention.</p> <p>Children in the DS group were recruited from public day care centres and institutions providing social, artistic, and educational training, and through advertisements published in the university gazette and in the public transportation system. All participants resided in Mexico City. The inclusion criteria for both groups were: no visual or hearing problems (as verified by otoacoustic emissions audiometry and a standardised visual acuity test, both applied by trained laboratory staff), no neurological or psychiatric problems (according to parental report), and regular trisomy (T21, in the case of Down syndrome children). The DS and TD children were matched by MA using a reliable abbreviated version (Sattler, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref40">39</reflink>]) of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-III (Wechsler, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref41">44</reflink>]), made up of three subtests: Receptive Vocabulary (the child is asked to point to one image of four presented by the examiner); Block Design (the child views a model and/or a picture and is asked to use one or two colour blocks to recreate the design); and Object Assembly (the child assembles the pieces of a puzzle to create a representation of an identified object). The reliability and validity values of the abbreviated version are 0.93 and 0.74, respectively.</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-6">Experimental Task</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0156218232-7">Stimuli</hd> <p>Thirty concrete and familiar nouns were used. The words were two-, three-, and four-syllable words of early acquisition, according to the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories for Spanish Children with Down Syndrome (Galeote et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref42">20</reflink>]). Of the 30 words, 10 served as primes, 10 as targets, and 10 as distractors. The prime words were always presented orally. Target and distractor images were organised in such a way as to form fixed pairs. Two conditions were created according to the relationship between the prime and the target: Associative Related and Unrelated. In the Associative Related condition the prime and target words had high or medium associative strength (Salles et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref43">38</reflink>]) according to the database Word Association Norms in Mexican Spanish (Arias-Trejo & Barrón-Martínez, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref44">3</reflink>]; Barrón-Martínez & Arias-Trejo, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref45">6</reflink>]) and no other lexical relationship, such as a semantic or phonological one. Pairs in the Unrelated condition had no association, according to the database. The unrelated pairs were created by changing the position of the prime in the fixed target-distractor pairs with the objective of cancelling out the relationship between the prime and the target. Table 1 shows the prime and target-distractor pairs. The distractor did not have an associative relationship with the prime or target (or phonological, semantic, or perceptual relationships) in either condition.</p> <p>Table 1. Primes, targets, and distractors used in related and unrelated conditions</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Associative Related Condition</td><td /><td>Associative Unrelated Condition</td></tr><tr><td>Prime</td><td>Target</td><td>Distractor</td><td>Prime</td><td>Target</td><td>Distractor</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>granja [farm]</td><td>caballo [horse]</td><td>queso [cheese]</td><td>cepillo [toothbrush]</td><td>caballo [horse]</td><td>queso [cheese]</td></tr><tr><td>cepillo [toothbrush]</td><td>dientes [teeth]</td><td>guitarra [guitar]</td><td>abeja [bee]</td><td>dientes [teeth]</td><td>guitarra [guitar]</td></tr><tr><td>abeja [bee]</td><td>flor [flower]</td><td>pastel [cake]</td><td>granja [farm]</td><td>flor [flower]</td><td>pastel [cake]</td></tr><tr><td>árbol [tree]</td><td>pájaro [bird]</td><td>jabón [soap]</td><td>niño [boy]</td><td>pájaro [bird]</td><td>jabón [soap]</td></tr><tr><td>niño [boy]</td><td>triciclo [tricycle]</td><td>raqueta [racquet]</td><td>árbol [tree]</td><td>triciclo [tricycle]</td><td>raqueta [racquet]</td></tr><tr><td>huevo [egg]</td><td>gallina [hen]</td><td>calcetín [sock]</td><td>puerta [door]</td><td>gallina [hen]</td><td>calcetín [sock]</td></tr><tr><td>bebé [baby]</td><td>carreola [stroller]</td><td>taza [mug]</td><td>caja [box]</td><td>carreola [stroller]</td><td>taza [mug]</td></tr><tr><td>caja [box]</td><td>zapato [shoe]</td><td>almohada [pillow]</td><td>niña [girl]</td><td>zapato [shoe]</td><td>almohada [pillow]</td></tr><tr><td>niña [girl]</td><td>muñeca [doll]</td><td>oso [bear]</td><td>huevo [egg]</td><td>muñeca [doll]</td><td>oso [bear]</td></tr><tr><td>puerta [door]</td><td>llave [key]</td><td>pluma [pen]</td><td>bebé[baby]</td><td>llave [key]</td><td>pluma [pen]</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0156218232-8">Audio Stimuli</hd> <p>The nouns were digitally recorded by a female Spanish-speaker using infant-directed speech in a soundproof room; they were edited at 44,100 Hz and 16-bits and normalised and adjusted in amplitude and volume.</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-9">Visual Stimuli</hd> <p>Visual stimuli were target-distractor image pairs selected from open-source image databases. The 20 images employed were concrete, of early acquisition, familiar, and prototypical, validated in a pilot study with a different group of TD children with an average CA of 11.79 years (<emph>SD </emph>= 0.25) (Barrón-Martínez et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref46">7</reflink>]). All target-distractor image pairs were of the same size (1,440 x 1,080 pixels) and were presented on a grey background.</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-10">Experimental Design</hd> <p>Ten trials were conducted, five for each condition (Related and Unrelated), in pseudo-randomised order, as no more than two trials from the same condition were presented consecutively. Each trial had a total duration of 4,700 ms. Images appeared on the left or right side of the monitor and used the same number of times as targets or distractors. The inter-stimulus interval (ISI) and the stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA) were both 200 ms. Each trial was conducted according to the following sequence: an attention getter (0 to 500 ms), the auditory prime word (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref47">2</reflink>,000 ms), the ISI (2,000 to 2,200 ms), target and distractor images appearing simultaneously (2,200 to 4,700 ms), 10 SOA (2,200 to 2,400 ms), and finally the auditory target word (2,400 ms). Figure 1 illustrates this sequence.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Example of a sequence trial.</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-11">Procedure</hd> <p>Participants were evaluated in a single session in the laboratory or at their school or day care, depending on parental availability. Children were seated at a distance of 60 cm from an LED monitor (23-inch, resolution 1,920 x 1,080). A portable Tobii model X2-30 eye-tracker was employed to monitor their visual attention. This device records and analyses eye movements using infrared diodes to generate reflection patterns in participants' corneas in order to capture visual preferences. Reflection data are collected by sensors; the device calculates the three-dimensional position of each eyeball and finally the point on the screen at which the person is looking. The sampling rate was 30 Hz.</p> <p>Sociodemographic information to validate inclusion criteria and an informed consent form, signed by the primary caregiver, were obtained before or during the experimental session. Participants were instructed to look at the images on the monitor. A five-point calibration video with a cartoon image attention-getter was presented to each participant at the start of the session. The experiment began when at least three of the five points were successfully calibrated for both eyes. Two familiarisation trials presenting two cartoon images were then presented to ensure the participant's attention, followed by the experimental trials. The researcher remained outside the room during the experiment, monitoring children's attention from a computer. The complete session lasted approximately one hour.</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-12">Results</hd> <p>Four criteria were employed for data analysis: 1) trials with no attention were excluded; 2) trials with less than 10% attention to the target and distractor within the Analysis Window (less than 200 ms) were excluded; 3) participants who completed less than 60% of the trials (three related and three unrelated trials) were excluded; and 4) outliers of more than two standard deviations were replaced by the overall mean. Of the 520 original trials with both groups, 488 (81.35%) were analysed: 240 with the DS group and 248 with the TD group. The analysis was performed from 2,700 to 4,700 ms, that is, 300 ms after the auditory target word was heard, because previous research (Canfield, Smith, Brezsnyak, & Snow, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref48">8</reflink>]) suggests that a looking task requires a short reaction time to evoke a participant's visual response. The measure employed was the Proportion of Target Looking (PTL), the duration of attention to the target divided by the total duration looking at the target and distractor images (T/(T + D)).</p> <p>The data were analysed in a 2 × 2 repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the factors Condition (Related and Unrelated) as a within-subjects factor and Group (Down Syndrome and Typical Development) as a between-subjects factor. The results showed a significant effect of Condition (<emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref49">1</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref50">50</reflink>) = 14.03, <emph>p</emph> =.001, <emph>M1 </emph>= 0.55, <emph>M2 </emph>= 0.44, <emph>ɳ2 </emph>=.21). Both DS and TD groups showed a significantly greater PTL in Related than in Unrelated trials. There were no other significant effects or interaction. The results are shown in Figure 2; for illustrative purposes, the mean PTL is separated by group.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Mean Proportion of Target Looking (PTL) in Related and Unrelated Trials in Down Syndrome and Typical Development groups. The horizontal line represents the chance level (± EE).</p> <p>Comparisons to chance level (.50) indicated that children with DS looked marginally above chance level at the target in the Related condition (<emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref51">25</reflink>) = 1.79, <emph>p</emph> =.08), but significantly below chance level in the Unrelated condition (<emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref52">25</reflink>) = −2.58, p = 0.01). Children with TD also looked marginally above chance level at the target in the Related Condition (<emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref53">25</reflink>) = 1.92, <emph>p</emph> =.05), but not in the Unrelated condition (<emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref54">25</reflink>) = −1.20, <emph>p</emph> = 0.24). With the aim of exploring whether the priming effect was related to the Receptive Vocabulary in both groups, a Pearson correlation test was performed between the mean PTL and the scalar and row score on the Receptive Vocabulary subtest of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-III (Wechsler, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref55">44</reflink>]). There was no significant correlation of the two measures for the DS (<emph>r</emph> (<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref56">25</reflink>) = −0.02, <emph>p</emph> = 0.91) or the TD group (<emph>r</emph> (<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref57">25</reflink>) = −0.19, <emph>p</emph> = 0.47).</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-13">Discussion</hd> <p>This study used an eye-tracker technique to investigate the ability of children with DS to establish associative relations between words (e.g. egg-hen) in a priming task. The results showed that children with DS (mean MA 3.80 years) are sensitive to associative relationships between words. Both DS and TD groups evidenced priming effects through facilitation when exposed to pairs of associatively related words (e.g. egg-hen). Both groups of children showed a greater preference for looking at a target image after hearing a prime-target related word pair than after hearing an unrelated word. Analysis of the DS group demonstrated that preference for the associatively related trials was, like the control group, marginally above chance levels. In other words, the priming effect of the DS population was comparable to that of the TD group. In order to understand which variables could be associated with the priming effect, a correlation analysis was performed between the PTL in the Related condition and Receptive Vocabulary scores on the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Intelligence Scale-III (Wechsler, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref58">44</reflink>]). No correlation was encountered, indicating that receptive vocabulary is apparently not linked with the ability to establish associative relations in children with DS at 3 years 8 months of MA, as had been suggested in previous studies (Laws et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref59">25</reflink>]; Smith & Jarrold, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref60">41</reflink>]). Although the relationship between associative links and their receptive vocabulary has not been demonstrated in TD children, a relationship between lexical comprehension and oral production has been shown using parental reports on children's vocabularies (Mani, Durrat, & Floccia, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref61">28</reflink>]; Mani & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref62">30</reflink>]). However, in the present study, because the children were aged 3 years 8 months, it was not possible to obtain parental reports of the participants' vocabulary size, since the CDI is typically applied to children under the age of 3 years.</p> <p>As mentioned in the Introduction, the population with Down syndrome is characterised by language difficulties, mainly in oral production (Chapman, Schwartz, & Bird, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref63">11</reflink>]; Katsarou & Andreou, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref64">23</reflink>]; Næss et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref65">34</reflink>]). However, research has also suggested that their lexical comprehension skills are similar to those of their typical peers (Galeote et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref66">19</reflink>]; Katsarou & Andreou, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref67">23</reflink>]; Næss et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref68">34</reflink>]). This allowed us to ask whether children with DS have a lexical network organised through relationships between words, independent of their problems at the oral production level. We explored associative relationships because in populations with typical development these relationships appear during the second year of life (Arias-Trejo & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref69">4</reflink>]; Styles & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref70">43</reflink>]). Moreover, according to Lucariello and Nelson ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref71">26</reflink>]), associative relationships in the lexicon predominate over categories grouped as taxonomic because words with associative links share a common space, function, context, and everyday use.</p> <p>What is the cognitive process involved in the formation of associative relationships in children with DS? There is no direct empirical evidence to answer this question. Nevertheless, it is probable that the DS group have developed a capacity for conceptual abstraction that allows them to extract functional and contextual properties of objects and determine whether they can occur in the same context or scenario (e.g. an egg and a hen tend to be found together in the context of a farm). This capacity for abstraction has been reported in previous research on the DS population (Cornewell, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref72">13</reflink>]; Laws & Gunn, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref73">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>The results obtained in the current study are consistent with the distributed model (McClelland & Rogers, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref74">31</reflink>]), which has focused on explaining semantic cognition as a network. This model has proposed a representation of concepts (e.g. hen) and their characteristics and features (e.g. egg) as nodes and the association between them as links. The nodes and links are organised in layers and specific activation patterns. The cohesion in the network is strengthened and fed with the contextual co-occurrence of words and their attributes and a person's experience with the surrounding world. That is, the greater the association between the words and their features, the better the cohesion between them, and the more efficient the lexical organisation. Contextual experience plays an important, gradual role as a tool or strategy of lexical organisation (Stuart & Hulme, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref75">42</reflink>]), as seen with the words employed in our study (e.g. egg-hen).</p> <p>The limited existing empirical evidence about the ability of people with DS to organise their lexical network is heterogeneous in its methodologies and results. Previous studies (Nash & Snowling, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref76">35</reflink>]; Smith & Jarrold, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref77">41</reflink>]) have concluded that children with DS with a mental age of 7 or 8 years showed a significantly lower performance than their typical peers on tasks that involved the oral production of words belonging to the same category, or the recall of related and unrelated words. Nevertheless, our results show that the ability to link words develops at an even earlier age: children with DS were able to link words through associative features at a mental age of 3.8 years. This finding offers the first evidence of the organisation of the lexicon in DS during childhood, an ability to relate words that has been linked to the efficient 15 processing of language in children (Arias-Trejo & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref78">5</reflink>]; Mani & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref79">30</reflink>]; Styles & Plunkett, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref80">43</reflink>]). The visual tracking methodology and the priming task design used here provide an important means to explore the lexical organisation in populations with DS, where lexical production presents difficulties, because it does not require an explicit verbal response.</p> <p>Further research is needed to understand the lexical organisation and mechanisms involved in the ability to form relationships between words in children with DS, not only at an associative level but also at the semantic, perceptual, and phonological levels. A longitudinal experimental design could be used to determine not only the type of lexical relations formed by people with DS, but also which type emerges first in the course of development.</p> <p>Although this study presents important findings, its limitations should be taken into consideration for future research. One limitation was a lack of standardisation in the number of syllables used in the prime words. This factor, as well as the perceptual similarity of the images representing these words, should be controlled in order to control lexical activation and avoid the influence of visual preferences, respectively.</p> <p>The results of this study represent a first step in the understanding of the lexical network of children with DS, which is an important key to lexical processing, implicit and working memory, and learning mechanisms in people with intellectual disabilities. These results may be an important tool for the design of intervention programmes or educational rehabilitation focusing on the lexical strengths of children and adolescents with Down syndrome.</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-14">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>We wish to thank participants, parents, teachers, caregivers, and the institutions: Fundación CTDUCA I.A.P., Integración Down I.A.P., Fundación Mosaico Down A.C. and Familias extraordinarias. We are also grateful to the members of the Laboratorio de Psicolingüística at UNAM for their assistance. We especially appreciate the comments of three doctoral tutors who enriched this research: Dr. Miguel Galeote Moreno (Malaga University, Spain), Dr. Octavio C. García González (UNAM, Mexico) and Dr. Francisco A. Robles Aguirre (University of Guadalajara, Mexico).</p> <hd id="AN0156218232-15">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <ref id="AN0156218232-16"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref10" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Abbeduto, L., Warren, S. F., & Conners, F. A. (2007). Languaje development in Down syndrome: From the prelinguistic period to the acquisition of literacy. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 13, 247 – 261.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref4" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Abbeduto, L., Warren, S. F., Conners, F. A., Pavetto, M., Kesin, E., Weissman, M., ... Cawthon, S. (2001). The linguistic and cognitive profile of Down syndrome: Evidence from a comparison with fragile X syndrome. Down Syndrome: Research and Practice, 13, 9 – 15.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref44" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Arias-Trejo, N., & Barrón-Martínez, J. B. (2014). Base de Datos: Normas de Asociación de Palabras para el Español de México. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.labpsicolinguistica.psicol.unam.mx/Base">http://www.labpsicolinguistica.psicol.unam.mx/Base</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref20" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Arias-Trejo, N., & Plunkett, K. (2009). Lexical-semantic priming effects during infancy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 364 (1536), 3633 – 3647.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref78" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Arias-Trejo, N., & Plunkett, K. (2010). The effects of perceptual similarity and category membership on early word-referent identification. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 105, 63 – 80.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref45" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Barrón-Martínez, J. B., & Arias-Trejo, N. (2014). Word Association Norms in Mexican Spanish. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17, 1 – 13.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref46" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Barrón-Martínez, J. B, Arias-Trejo, N, Salvador-Cruz, J, Galeote, M, García, O, & Robles Aguirre, F. A. (2019). La formación de redes léxicas en niños con síndrome de down. UNAM.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref48" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Canfield, R. L, Smith, E. G, Brezsnyak, M. P, & Snow, K. L. (1997). Information processing through the first year of life: a longitudinal study using the visual expectation paradigm. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 62 (2), 1 – 145. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1166196</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref6" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Chapman, R. S. (1997). Language development in children and adolescents with Down syndrome. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 3, 307 – 312.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chapman, R. S. (2006). Language learning in Down syndrome: The speech and language profile compared to adolescents with cognitive impairment of unknown origin. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 10 (6), 61 – 66.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chapman, R. S., Schwartz, S., & Bird, E. K. (1991). Language skills of children and adolescents with Down syndrome: I. Comprehension. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 1106 – 1120.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407 – 428.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cornewell, A. C. (1974). Development of language, abstraction, and numerical concept formation in Down's syndrome children. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 79, 179 – 190.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dell, G. (1988). The retrieval of phonological forms in production: Test of prediction from a connectionist model. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 127 – 142.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Delle Luche, C., Durrant, S., Floccia, C., & Plunkett, K. (2014). Implicit meaning in 18-month-old toddlers. Developmental Science, 1 – 8. doi: 10.1111/desc.12164</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Elman, J. L. (1989). Structured representations and connectionist models. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Facon, B., Grubar, J. C., & Gardez, C. (1998). Chronological age and receptive vocabulary of persons with Down syndrome. Psychological Reports, 82, 723 – 726.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferrand, L., & New, B. (2003). Semantic and associative priming in the mental lexicon. Mental lexicon: Some words to talk about words. Hauppauge, NY : Nova Science Publisher.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Galeote, M., Sebastián, E., Checa, E., Rey, R., & Soto, P. (2011). The developmental of vocabulary in Spanish children witn Down syndrome: Comprehension, production and gestures. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 36, 184 – 196.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Galeote, M., Soto, P., Serrano, A., Pulido, L., Rey, R., & Martínez-Roa, P. (2006). Un nuevo instrumento para evaluar el desarrollo comunicativo y linguístico de niños con síndrome de Down. Revista Síndrome De Down, 23, 20 – 26.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Golinkoff, R. M., & Hirsch-Pasek, K. (1987). The eyes have it: Lexical and syntactic comprehension in a new paradigm. Journal of Child Language, 14, 23 – 46.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoff, E., & Naigles, L. (2002). How children use input to acquire a lexicon. Child Development, 73 (2), 418 – 433.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Katsarou, D., & Andreou, G. (2017). Receptive and expressive semantic skills in children with down syndrome. International Education and Research Journal, 3 (3), 135 – 136.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Laws, G., & Gunn, D. (2004). Phonological memory as a predictor of language comprehension in Down syndrome: A five-year follow-up study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 326 – 337.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Laws, G., Josie, B., Ang, S., Brown, H., Hermena, E., & Kapikian, A. (2014). Receptive vocabulary and semantic knowledge in children with SLI and children with Down syndrome. Child Neuropsychology, 1, 1 – 19.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lucariello, J., & Nelson, K. (1985). Slot-filler categories as memory organizers for young children. Developmental Psychology, 21 (2), 272 – 282.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lucas, M. (2000). Semantic priming without association: A meta-analytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7 (4), 618 – 630.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mani, N., Durrat, S., & Floccia, C. (2012). Activation of phonological and semantic codes in toddlers. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 612 – 622.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mani, N., & Plunkett, K. (2008). Phonological priming in infancy. Paper presented at the CogSci 2008: 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Washington, DC, USA.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mani, N., & Plunkett, K. (2011). Phonological priming and cohort effects in toddlers. Cognition, 121, 196 – 206.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McClelland, J. L., & Rogers, T. T. (2003). The parallel distributed processing approach to semantic cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 310 – 322.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1976). Meaning, memory structure, and mental processes. Science, 192, 27 – 33.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nadal, M., & Estivill, X. (2001). Correlaciones genotipo-fenotipo en casos de síndrome de Down con trisomía parcial del cromosoma 21. Revista Médica Internacional Sobre El Síndrome de Down, 5, 19 – 24.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Næss, K. A. B., Halaas Lyster, S. A., Hulme, C., & Melby-Lervag, M. (2011). Language and verbal short-term memory skills in children with Down syndrome: A meta-analytic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32, 2225 – 2234.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nash, H. M., & Snowling, M. J. (2008). Semantic and phonological fluency in children with Down syndrome: Atypical organization of language or less efficient retrieval strategies? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 25 (5), 690 – 703.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (1988). A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review, 95 (3), 385 – 408.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rosa, E., & Perea, M. (1998). Facilitación asociativa para palabras, pero no para pseudopalabras, con la técnica de presentación. Psicológica, 19, 295 – 309.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salles, J. F., Holderbaum, C. S., Becker, N., Rodrigues, J. C., Liedtke, F. V., Zibetti, M. R., & Piccoli, L. F. (2008). Normas de associação semântica para 88 palavras do Português Brasileiro. Revista PSICO, 39, 362 – 370.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sattler, J. (2010). Evaluación Infantil. Quinta edición. México : El Manual Moderno S.A.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Secretaría de Salud. (2007). Centro Nacional de Equidad de Género y Salud Reproductiva. Atención Integral de la Persona con síndrome de Down. Lineamiento Técnico. Secretaría de Salud 2007. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.salud.gob.mx/unidades/">http://www.salud.gob.mx/unidades/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, E., & Jarrold, C. (2014). Grouping, semantic relation and imagery effects in individuals with Down syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35, 3162 – 3174.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stuart, G, & Hulme, C. (2000). The effects of word co-occurrence on short-term memory: associative links in long-term memory affect short-term memory performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology-learning Memory and Cognition, 26 (3), 796 – 802.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Styles, S. J., & Plunkett, K. (2009). How do infants build a semantic system? Language and Cognition, 1, 1 – 24.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wechsler, D. (2003). WISC-IV: Technical and interpretive manual. San Antonio : The psychological Corporation.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Julia B. Barrón-Martínez; Natalia Arias-Trejo and Judith Salvador-Cruz</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref75"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1344140
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Associative Lexical Relationships in Children with Down Syndrome
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Barrón-Martínez%2C+Julia+B%2E%22">Barrón-Martínez, Julia B.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Arias-Trejo%2C+Natalia%22">Arias-Trejo, Natalia</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Salvador-Cruz%2C+Judith%22">Salvador-Cruz, Judith</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22International+Journal+of+Disability%2C+Development+and+Education%22"><i>International Journal of Disability, Development and Education</i></searchLink>. 2022 69(2):510-522.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 13
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Down+Syndrome%22">Down Syndrome</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Acquisition%22">Language Acquisition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Skills%22">Language Skills</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Young+Children%22">Young Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Association+%28Psychology%29%22">Association (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Visual+Stimuli%22">Visual Stimuli</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Auditory+Stimuli%22">Auditory Stimuli</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Processing%22">Language Processing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Measures+%28Individuals%29%22">Measures (Individuals)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Associative+Learning%22">Associative Learning</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mexico+%28Mexico+City%29%22">Mexico (Mexico City)</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Assessment and Survey Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22MacArthur+Communicative+Development+Inventory%22">MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/1034912X.2020.1726298
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1034-912X<br />1465-346X
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: From the second year of life, children with typical development (TD) demonstrate the ability to form word-word relations. However, this ability has received little attention in children with Down syndrome (DS). We investigated their ability to establish associative relationships between words that tend to occur in the same context. Two groups of children (TD and DS) matched by sex and mental age (mean 3.80 years) participated in a preferential looking test. A priming task using an eye-tracking technique in ten trials introduced associatively related versus unrelated word pairs. Participants in both groups were asked to find a target image (e.g. hen) when they heard an associative prime that was related (e.g. egg) or unrelated (e.g. door), and the mean proportion of target looking was then calculated. Both groups showed an associative priming effect. The results suggest that people with DS possess a lexical organisation. This study represents a first step in understanding lexical networks, an important factor in language processing, in people with DS, which could be used to design interventions or educational strategies for language therapy.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1344140
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1344140
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/1034912X.2020.1726298
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 13
        StartPage: 510
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Down Syndrome
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language Acquisition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language Skills
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Young Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Association (Psychology)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Visual Stimuli
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Auditory Stimuli
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language Processing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Measures (Individuals)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Associative Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mexico (Mexico City)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Associative Lexical Relationships in Children with Down Syndrome
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Barrón-Martínez, Julia B.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Arias-Trejo, Natalia
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Salvador-Cruz, Judith
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2022
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1034-912X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1465-346X
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 69
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: International Journal of Disability, Development and Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1