Article/Report  |   February 2006
Effect of Memory Support and Elicited Production on Fast Mapping of New Words by Adolescents With Down Syndrome
Author Notes
  • Contact author: Robin S. Chapman, Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin—Madison, 1500 Highland Avenue Madison, WI 53705. Email:chapman@waisman.wisc.edu
  • Linda Hesketh is now at the University of Oregon—Eugene.
    Linda Hesketh is now at the University of Oregon—Eugene.×
Special Populations / Genetic & Congenital Disorders / Attention, Memory & Executive Functions / Language
Article/Report   |   February 2006
Effect of Memory Support and Elicited Production on Fast Mapping of New Words by Adolescents With Down Syndrome
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research February 2006, Vol.49, 3-15. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2006/001)
History: Accepted 06 May 2005 , Received 24 Oct 2003
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research February 2006, Vol.49, 3-15. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2006/001)
History: Accepted 06 May 2005 , Received 24 Oct 2003

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine whether memory support and elicited production differentially benefited fast mapping of new vocabulary (comprehension, production accuracy, and speed) in adolescents with Down syndrome (DS) compared with typically developing (TD) children matched for syntax comprehension. The study also examined predictors of individual difference within groups.

Method: The ability of 19 adolescents with DS to fast map new noun vocabulary was compared with 18 TD children matched for syntax comprehension. The effects of memory support (5 examiner repetitions of the novel word vs. 1) and elicited production (2 repetitions by child vs. none) were evaluated in a repeated-measures design with counterbalancing of tasks.

Results: For novel word comprehension, low memory support impaired the TD but not DS participants. DS participants were slower to respond correctly in all conditions but benefited more from memory support than TD participants in speed of response. For novel word production, high memory support benefited all participants in the no-elicited-production condition. Elicited production improved performance equally in the 2 memory conditions. Standard comprehension measures predicted fast-mapped comprehension: vocabulary in the case of the DS group, syntax in the case of the TD group. Auditory short-term memory measures predicted fast-mapped production in the TD group but not the DS group. Hearing and grammatical morpheme comprehension predicted novel word production in the DS group.

Conclusions: DS participants' speed of comprehension of fast-mapped words was differentially increased compared with the TD syntax-comprehension–matched group, by memory support. Elicited production improved production fast-mapping for all participants, and memory support improved it in the absence of elicited production. Comprehension predicted individual differences in fast-mapped comprehension in DS; in addition, hearing predicted production.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access

Related Articles

Use of Speaker Intent and Grammatical Cues in Fast-Mapping by Adolescents With Down Syndrome
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research December 2007, Vol.50, 1546-1561. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/105)
Predicting Language Production in Children and Adolescents With Down Syndrome
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research April 2000, Vol.43, 340-350. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4302.340
Language Skills of Children and Adolescents With Down Syndrome
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research October 1991, Vol.34, 1106-1120. doi:10.1044/jshr.3405.1106
Verb Comprehension and Use in Children and Adults With Down Syndrome
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research December 2012, Vol.55, 1736-1749. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0050)
The Relationship Between Phonological Memory, Receptive Vocabulary, and Fast Mapping in Young Children With Specific Language Impairment
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research October 2006, Vol.49, 955-969. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2006/069)