Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-kfd97 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-26T08:20:52.265Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Early Language in Victoria Study: predicting vocabulary at age one and two years from gesture and object use

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2008

E. L. BAVIN ,
M. PRIOR ,
S. REILLY ,
L. BRETHERTON ,
J. WILLIAMS ,
P. EADIE ,
Y. BARRETT  and
O. C. UKOUMUNNE
E. L. BAVIN*
Affiliation:
School of Psychological Science, La Trobe University
M. PRIOR
Affiliation:
School of Behavioural Sciences, University of Melbourne
S. REILLY
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne and Speech Pathology Department, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne
L. BRETHERTON
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne
J. WILLIAMS
Affiliation:
Centre for Community Child Health & Centre for Adolescent Health, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne
P. EADIE
Affiliation:
Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne
Y. BARRETT
Affiliation:
Speech Pathology Department, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne
O. C. UKOUMUNNE
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne and Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne
*
Address for correpondence: Edith L. Bavin, School of Psychological Science, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3083, Australia. Tel: +61 3 9479 2530.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Macarthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories (CDI) have been used widely to document early communicative development. The paper reports on a large community sample of 1,447 children recruited from low, middle and high socioeconomic (SES) areas across metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Regression analyses were conducted to determine the extent to which communicative behaviours reported at 0 ; 8 and 1 ; 0 predicted vocabulary development at 1 ; 0 and 2 ; 0. In support of previous findings with smaller, often less representative samples, gesture and object use at 1 ; 0 were better predictors of 2 ; 0 vocabulary than were gesture and object use at 0 ; 8. At 1 ; 0, children from the lower SES groups were reported to understand more words than children from the higher SES groups, but there were no SES differences for words produced at 1 ; 0 or 2 ; 0. The findings add to our understanding of the variability in the development of early communicative behaviours.

Information

Type
Brief Research Report
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , August 2008 , pp. 687 - 701
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

The ELVS research was undertaken with a grant from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). O. C. Ukoumunne's postdoctoral position is funded by an NHMRC Population Health Capacity Building Grant (436914).

References

REFERENCES

Bates, E. & Dick, F. (2002). Language, gesture and the developing brain. Developmental Psychobiology 40, 293–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, E. & Goodman, J. C. (1999). On the emergence of grammar from the lexicon. In MacWhinney, B. (ed.) Emergence of language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bates, E., Thal, D., Whitesell, K., Fenson, L. & Oakes, L. (1989). Integrating language and gesture in infancy. Developmental Psychology 25, 1004–1010.Google Scholar
Benasich, A. & Tallal, P. (2002). Infant discrimination of rapid auditory cues predicts language impairment. Behavioral Brain Research 136, 31–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Capone, N. & McGregor, K. (2004). Gesture development: A review for clinical and research practices. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 47, 173–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dale, P., Bates, E., Reznick, S. & Morisset, C. (1989). The validity of a parent report instrument of child language at twenty months. Journal of Child Language 16, 239–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, H., Dollaghan, C., Campbell, T., Kurs-Lasky, M., Janosky, J. & Paradis, J. (2000). Measurement properties of the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories at ages one and two years. Child Development 1, 310–22.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Bates, E., Dale, P., Goodman, J., Reznick, J. S. & Thal, D. (2000). Measuring variability in early child language: Don't shoot the messenger. Child Development 71, 323–8.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Dale, P., Reznick, J. S., Thal, D., Bates, E., Hartung, J., Pethick, S. & Reilly, J. (1993). The MacArthur Communicative Developmental Inventories: Users guide and manual. San Diego, CA: Singular publishing Group.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Marchman, V., Thal, D., Dale, P., Reznick, J. S. & Bates, E. (2007). MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories: Users guide and manual, 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Hamilton, A., Plunkett, K. & Schafer, G. (2000). Infant vocabulary and development assessed with a British Communicative Development Inventory. Journal of Child Language 27, 689–705.Google Scholar
Heilmann, J., Ellis, Weismer S., Evans, J. & Hollar, C. (2005). Utility of the MacAthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory in identifying language abilities of late-talking and typically developing toddlers. American Journal of Speech–Language Pathology 14, 40–51.Google Scholar
Iverson, J. & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2005). Gesture paves the way for language development. Psychological Science 16, 367–71.Google Scholar
Liszkowski, U., Carpenter, M., Striano, T. & Tomasello, M. (2006). 12- and 18-month-olds provide information for others. Journal of Cognition and Development 7, 173–87.Google Scholar
Marchman, V. A. & Bates, E. (1994). Continuity in lexical and morphological development: A test of the critical mass hypothesis. Journal of Child Language 12, 339–66.Google Scholar
Reese, E. & Read, S. (2000). Predictive validity of the New Zealand MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories: Words and Sentences. Journal of Child Language 27, 255–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reilly, S., Eadie, P., Bavin, E. L., Wake, M., Prior, M., Williams, J., Bretherton, L., Barrett, Y. & Ukoumunne, O. C. (2006). Growth of infant communication between 8 and 12 months: A population study. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health 42, 764–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reilly, S., Wake, M., Bavin, E. L., Prior, M., Williams, J., Bretherton, L., Eadie, P., Barrett, Y. & Ukoumunne, O. C. (2007). Predicting language at age 2 years: A prospective community study. Pediatrics 120, e1–e9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thal, D., Bates, E., Goodman, J. & Jahn-Samilo, J. (1997). Continuity of language abilities: An exploratory study of late- and early-talking toddlers. Developmental Neuropsychology 13, 239–73.Google Scholar
Thal, D., O'Hanlon, L., Clemmons, M. & Fralin, L. (1999). Validity of apparent report measure of vocabulary and syntax for preschool children with language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 42, 482–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thal, D., Tobias, S. & Morrison, D. (1991). Language and gesture in late talkers: a 1-year follow-up. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 34, 604–612.Google Scholar
Tsao, F.-M., Liu, H.-M. & Kuhl, P. K. (2004). Speech perception in infants predicts language development in the second year of life: A longitudinal study. Child Development 75, 1067–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Volterra, V., Caselli, M. C., Capirci, O. & Pizzuto, E. (2005). Gesture and the emergence of language. In Tomasello, M. & Slobin, D. I. (eds) Beyond nature–nurture: Essays in honor of Elizabeth Bates. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Westerlund, M., Berglund, E. & Eriksson, M. (2006). Can severely language delayed 3-year-olds be identified at 18 months? Evaluation of a screening version of the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 49, 237–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wetherby, A., Allen, L., Cleary, J., Kublin, K. & Goldstein, H. (2002). Validity and reliability of the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales Developmental Profile with very young children. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 45, 1202–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed