Cargando…
The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment
What memory systems underlie grammar in children, and do these differ between typically developing (TD) children and children with specific language impairment (SLI)? Whilst there is substantial evidence linking certain memory deficits to the language problems in children with SLI, few studies have...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522516/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26284013 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01090 |
_version_ | 1782383957361295360 |
---|---|
author | Conti-Ramsden, Gina Ullman, Michael T. Lum, Jarrad A. G. |
author_facet | Conti-Ramsden, Gina Ullman, Michael T. Lum, Jarrad A. G. |
author_sort | Conti-Ramsden, Gina |
collection | PubMed |
description | What memory systems underlie grammar in children, and do these differ between typically developing (TD) children and children with specific language impairment (SLI)? Whilst there is substantial evidence linking certain memory deficits to the language problems in children with SLI, few studies have investigated multiple memory systems simultaneously, examining not only possible memory deficits but also memory abilities that may play a compensatory role. This study examined the extent to which procedural, declarative, and working memory abilities predict receptive grammar in 45 primary school aged children with SLI (30 males, 15 females) and 46 TD children (30 males, 16 females), both on average 9;10 years of age. Regression analyses probed measures of all three memory systems simultaneously as potential predictors of receptive grammar. The model was significant, explaining 51.6% of the variance. There was a significant main effect of learning in procedural memory and a significant group × procedural learning interaction. Further investigation of the interaction revealed that procedural learning predicted grammar in TD but not in children with SLI. Indeed, procedural learning was the only predictor of grammar in TD. In contrast, only learning in declarative memory significantly predicted grammar in SLI. Thus, different memory systems are associated with receptive grammar abilities in children with SLI and their TD peers. This study is, to our knowledge, the first to demonstrate a significant group by memory system interaction in predicting grammar in children with SLI and their TD peers. In line with Ullman’s Declarative/Procedural model of language and procedural deficit hypothesis of SLI, variability in understanding sentences of varying grammatical complexity appears to be associated with variability in procedural memory abilities in TD children, but with declarative memory, as an apparent compensatory mechanism, in children with SLI. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4522516 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45225162015-08-17 The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment Conti-Ramsden, Gina Ullman, Michael T. Lum, Jarrad A. G. Front Psychol Psychology What memory systems underlie grammar in children, and do these differ between typically developing (TD) children and children with specific language impairment (SLI)? Whilst there is substantial evidence linking certain memory deficits to the language problems in children with SLI, few studies have investigated multiple memory systems simultaneously, examining not only possible memory deficits but also memory abilities that may play a compensatory role. This study examined the extent to which procedural, declarative, and working memory abilities predict receptive grammar in 45 primary school aged children with SLI (30 males, 15 females) and 46 TD children (30 males, 16 females), both on average 9;10 years of age. Regression analyses probed measures of all three memory systems simultaneously as potential predictors of receptive grammar. The model was significant, explaining 51.6% of the variance. There was a significant main effect of learning in procedural memory and a significant group × procedural learning interaction. Further investigation of the interaction revealed that procedural learning predicted grammar in TD but not in children with SLI. Indeed, procedural learning was the only predictor of grammar in TD. In contrast, only learning in declarative memory significantly predicted grammar in SLI. Thus, different memory systems are associated with receptive grammar abilities in children with SLI and their TD peers. This study is, to our knowledge, the first to demonstrate a significant group by memory system interaction in predicting grammar in children with SLI and their TD peers. In line with Ullman’s Declarative/Procedural model of language and procedural deficit hypothesis of SLI, variability in understanding sentences of varying grammatical complexity appears to be associated with variability in procedural memory abilities in TD children, but with declarative memory, as an apparent compensatory mechanism, in children with SLI. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-08-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4522516/ /pubmed/26284013 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01090 Text en Copyright © 2015 Conti-Ramsden, Ullman and Lum. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Conti-Ramsden, Gina Ullman, Michael T. Lum, Jarrad A. G. The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment |
title | The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment |
title_full | The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment |
title_fullStr | The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment |
title_full_unstemmed | The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment |
title_short | The relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment |
title_sort | relation between receptive grammar and procedural, declarative, and working memory in specific language impairment |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522516/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26284013 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01090 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT contiramsdengina therelationbetweenreceptivegrammarandproceduraldeclarativeandworkingmemoryinspecificlanguageimpairment AT ullmanmichaelt therelationbetweenreceptivegrammarandproceduraldeclarativeandworkingmemoryinspecificlanguageimpairment AT lumjarradag therelationbetweenreceptivegrammarandproceduraldeclarativeandworkingmemoryinspecificlanguageimpairment AT contiramsdengina relationbetweenreceptivegrammarandproceduraldeclarativeandworkingmemoryinspecificlanguageimpairment AT ullmanmichaelt relationbetweenreceptivegrammarandproceduraldeclarativeandworkingmemoryinspecificlanguageimpairment AT lumjarradag relationbetweenreceptivegrammarandproceduraldeclarativeandworkingmemoryinspecificlanguageimpairment |