Learning and Teaching About Grants and Scientific Writing

IS01

Learning and Teaching about Grants and Scientific Writing

Susan Ellis Weismer; University of Wisconsin-Madison
Lisa Goffman; Purdue University
Karla McGregor; University of Iowa
Elena Plante; University of Arizona
Holly Storkel; University of Kansas

This tutorial is intended for students and new investigators who are interested in learning how to secure grant funding for research and to improve scientific writing more broadly, as well as for those who are teaching and mentoring these skills. Five experienced child language disorders researchers/grantees from different universities (Iowa, Arizona, Kansas, Purdue, Wisconsin) will share their expertise on these topics. Following brief individual presentations, the panel of presenters will answer questions, providing multiple perspectives in response to questions. With regard to grant writing, topics will include identifying the appropriate funding mechanism and agency, outlining components of grants, demystifying the review process, and responding to reviews during resubmission. Scientific writing topics will focus on effective writing strategies associated with grants, technical reports, and manuscripts. Experts will provide tips on productivity and clarity in writing. Sample course syllabi will be shared, along with suggested texts and workbooks. SRCLD attendees with all levels of experience are encouraged to participate to exchange advice and best practices in writing of research proposals and publications. Funding for this presentation was provided by NIDCD/NICHD R13DC00167.

IS02

Language Research at NIH: Perspectives from NIDCD and NICHD

Judith A. Cooper; NIDCD/NIH
Ruben P. Alvarez; NIDCD/NIH

NIH and the research community are facing a myriad of changes and challenges. It is critical for individuals seeking NIH funding to be current and knowledgeable, for the benefit of themselves and those they mentor. Researchers in child language ARE being funded and NIH maintains an ongoing commitment to supporting that research. This presentation will address topics of importance to new as well as more senior researchers. Discussion will include critical updates about NIH, NIDCD and NICHD; opportunities for beginning researchers; recent trends in language research; and where to go for help.

IS03

Genetic Contributions to Language, Reading, and ADHD

Shelley D. Smith; University of Nebraska Medical Center

Language Impairment (LI) and Reading Disability (RD) have distinct diagnostic criteria but may share some underlying liabilities, and children with early language problems are at increased risk for later reading problems. Both disorders show evidence of genetic influence, and several candidate genes have been described for each disorder individually, such as DCDC2 and KIAA0319 for RD and CMIP for LI, but subsequent studies have shown that reading related abilities were associated with CMIP and language disabilities were associated with KIAA0319, suggesting that there are common etiologic factors. To tease apart these differences as well as commonalities, we have studied a panel of 19 candidate genes which have been associated with RD, LI, or another comorbid condition, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Families from three populations were studied: two ascertained with Language Impairment in collaboration with Dr. Mabel Rice at the University of Kansas, and a large population with Reading Disability and/or ADHD in collaboration with the Colorado Learning Disabilities Research Center (Richard Olson, PI). All of the children had extensive phenotypic testing. The goals are to identify genes that affect each disorder separately, as well as genes associated with both disorders, and determine the abilities, or endophenotypes, associated with those genes. This should help define shared and unique deficits. The long-term goals of this line of research are to identify pathways of neuronal development that are shared by these disorders, and where they diverge. Understanding these conditions at a developmental level can lead to new ways of thinking about diagnosis and treatment.

This research was funded by NIH:NIDCD R01DC001803 and NIH-NIDCD R01DC005226 to Mabel Rice and NIH-NICHD P50HD027802 to Richard Olson

IS04

How does the brain learn to read?

James R. Booth; The University of Texas at Austin

Reading is fundamental to human society and the costs of illiteracy are enormous. In this lecture, I will discuss our attempts to uncover the mechanisms underlying the development of our amazing abilities to read. I will argue that general principles of brain development are key to reaching a deeper understanding in this field of inquiry. These principles suggest increases across development in (1) the specialization of brain regions for different computations and (2) the interaction between brain regions through enhanced connectivity. I will also review evidence suggesting that our growing knowledge of typical brain development is relevant for understanding why approximately 6% of children have reading disabilities. Finally, I will discuss our recent attempts at using brain imaging to predict subsequent gains in reading skill.
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (R01 HD042049, R21 DC006149).

IS05

What Types of Linguistic Generalizations Persist Over Time?

LouAnn Gerken; University of Arizona

Long-term generalization is a central goal of language intervention. What does infant

artificial grammar learning contribute to understanding how to achieve this goal? Previous research from my lab and many others has demonstrated that infants who are typically developing generalize most linguistic rules with apparent ease. But does this generalization persist? And does determining what persists and what does not contribute to our understanding of atypical learners? My talk will attempt to grapple with these questions, and it will consist of three parts. First I’ll provide an overview of different types of non-linguistic learning tasks that were described over half a century ago by Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961). These tasks include generalizing from input examples based on single features shared by all examples vs. family resemblance relations, as well as other bases. I will attempt to map different types of linguistic learning onto these Shepard et al. tasks. Next I’ll present work on infant linguistic rule learning. In this part, I’ll show how at least some infant learning appears to follow rational principles, is extremely rapid, but doesn’t appear to persist for even a few seconds. In contrast, other learning may occur via a different mechanism, takes somewhat longer, and appears to persist over time. Finally, I’ll suggest some new directions for infant artificial grammar learning research and how these directions may apply to the treatment of affected components of linguistic and non-linguistic processing in childhood language disorders.

SOP1-1

Neural Patterns Elicited by Syntactic Violations Uniquely Characterize Typical Development, SLI Recovery, and SLI Persistence

Eileen Haebig; Purdue University
Laurence Leonard; Purdue University
Patricia Deevy; Purdue University
J. Bruce Tomblin; University of Iowa
Christine Weber; Purdue University

The trajectory of language impairments is important to study in order to develop a comprehensive understanding of this disorder. Therefore, this study examined behavioral and neural indices of sentence processing in adolescents with different language trajectories. Specifically, we compared accuracy performance and event-related brain potentials (ERPs) from adolescents who participated in a sentence processing task that included correctly agreeing verbs and violations of verb agreement (omission or commission of third person singular -s). Groups consisted of adolescents with normal language development (NL), adolescents with a history of language impairment (SLI-Recovered), and adolescents with persistent language impairment (SLI-Persistent). The NL and SLI-Recovered groups performed significantly better than the SLI-Persistent group. ERP data revealed that the SLI-Persistent group tended to have a smaller amplitude P600 elicited by verb-agreement violations, relative to the other groups. Additionally, each group had a unique neural pattern during the commission violation condition. Although behavioral data did not differentiate the NL and SLI-Recovered groups, ERPs suggest that adolescents in the SLI-Recovered group displayed less efficient neural processing of syntactic errors.

Funding: P50 DC02746, T32 DC00030

SOP1-2

Gesture production in specific language impairment: It’s quality not quantity that matters

Charlotte Wray; Royal Holloway, University of London
Courtenay Norbury; University College London

It is generally assumed that children with Specific Language Impairment (SLI) use gesture to compensate for deficits in oral language competence. However, gesture is a complex task integrating social, cognitive and motor skills. Thus, the ability to use gesture effectively in populations in which these precursor skills may be compromised is uncertain. The present study investigated gesture use in children with SLI during imitated, elicited and spontaneous gesture production, relative to typically developing peers. The findings indicate that children with SLI gestured as frequently as peers, and in complex tasks produced more extending gestures to convey information they could not verbalise. Nevertheless, the gestures they produced in imitation and elicitation tasks were not as accurate as those of their peers. The results support the notion that gesture and language form a tightly linked communication system in which gesture deficits are seen alongside difficulties with spoken communication. This research suggests that the quality, not quantity of gestures will distinguish children with SLI from typical peers.
This research is funded by the Wellcome Trust (WT094836AIA) and the Waterloo Foundation.

SOP1-3

Profiles of Memory Span: A Microanalysis of Span Elucidates Developmental Dyslexia With and Without Specific Language Impairment

Nelson Cowan; University of Missouri
Tiffany Hogan; MGH Institute of Health Professions
Mary Alt; University of Arizona
Sam Green; Arizona State University
Kathryn Cabbage; MGH Institute of Health Professions
Shara Brinkley; Arizona State University
Shelley Gray; Arizona State University

Psychometric tests are useful for understanding developmental disorders, but their value can be greatly improved through close attention to how specific task demands affect well-defined subpopulations. We show that one can learn a great deal about working memory in children with dyslexia using simple memory span tasks, by varying participant characteristics, stimuli, procedures, and measures. The three participant groups included those with both dyslexia and specific language impairment (dyslexia+SLI), their peers with dyslexia only, and their peers with typical development. Three types of stimuli used for memory span tasks included spoken digits, spatial locations, and irregular shapes. For each type, memory test procedures included the traditional span task and running span, in which few mnemonic strategies can be used. Several complementary dependent measures were used (e.g., scoring that ignored or considered serial position information). These systematic combinations of conditions go far beyond previous studies. We show benefits of this tightly controlled subtest battery as a bridge between experimental and psychometric approaches and find language-specific factors in dyslexia along with domain-general processing issues exacerbated by concomitant SLI.
Funding: NIDCD-R01-DC010784

SOP2-1

The influence of low language proficiency and exposure to an additional language on executive functioning

Katie Whiteside; Royal Holloway, University of London
Debbie Gooch; Royal Holloway, University of London
Courtenay Norbury; Royal Holloway, University of London

While bilingualism is associated with executive functioning advantages and language impairment in monolingual children is associated with executive functioning deficits, little research has merged these lines of enquiry. This study explored the effects of language proficiency and bilingualism on executive functioning in 53 children learning English as an Additional Language (EAL) and 53 monolingual peers who displayed either typical or low English language proficiency. Children completed measures of English language, selective attention, response inhibition, and verbal and visuospatial working memory during their second year of school in the UK (age 5-6). While children with EAL, regardless of language proficiency, displayed a response inhibition reaction time advantage relative to monolingual peers, no EAL advantages emerged on measures of selective attention or working memory. Low language proficiency was only associated with impaired response inhibition in monolingual children, and a similar trend was revealed for selective attention, highlighting that these measures may be particularly sensitive to language impairment rather than limited language experience.
This research was supported by the Wellcome Trust (WT094836AIA) and a Crossland Scholarship awarded by Royal Holloway, University of London.

SOP2-2

Grammatical Morphology in Monolingual and Bilingual Children with and without Language Impairment: The Case of Dutch Plurals and Past Participles

Tessel Boerma; Utrecht University
Frank Wijnen; Utrecht University
Elma Blom; Utrecht University

Grammatical morphology is a core deficit in children with Language Impairment (LI), but also often a locus of difficulty for bilingual children, complicating the diagnosis of LI in bilingual contexts. In contrast to previous research that mainly focused on tense and agreement markings on verbs, the present study investigated if and how plural and past participle formation could discriminate between monolingual and bilingual children with and without LI. Children were tested at two waves with a word formation task that elicited plural nouns and past participles. Results from the plural formation task showed overlapping language profiles of children with LI and bilingual children, both in terms of accuracy, error types as well as development over time. Past participle formation did not produce overlap between children with LI and bilingual children. Error analyses even showed that frequent omission of participial affixes may be indicative of LI, irrespective of linguistic background. Past participle inflection may therefore contribute to a reliable diagnosis of LI in monolingual and bilingual learning contexts.
This project was funded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research.

SOP2-3

Phonological transfer during word learning: Evidence from bilingual school-age Spanish-English-speaking children

Jessie Erikson; University of Arizona
Mary Alt; University of Arizona
Shelley Gray; Arizona State University
Tiffany Hogan; MGH Institute of Health Professions
Samuel Green; Arizona State University
Nelson Cowan; University of Missouri

Research on the phonological development of bilingual Spanish-English-speaking and monolingual English-speaking children has revealed that bilingual children may demonstrate differences in their English phonology during development due to transfer, or the application of rules from one language to the other (Fabiano-Smith & Goldstein, 2010). However, there is limited research on differences in phonological production for vocabulary acquired during the school-age years, particularly when most content is presented in English. We hypothesized that bilingual children would produce more errors on the consonants at the end of syllables (i.e., codas) legal in English only than those legal in both languages due to differences in the phonotactics of Spanish and English. We used data from an English-like nonword learning task to analyze differences in productions. Forty-three bilingual Spanish-English-speaking children ages 7-9 were matched with monolingual English-speaking peers for age, sex, mother's level of education, and Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation (GFTA-2) percentile scores. Results support the hypothesis, suggesting that phonological transfer may occur during the configuration state of word learning.
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health NIDCD (R01 DC010784).

SOP3-1

Does developmental social pragmatic intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder influence parent language use?

Mary Ke Meng Wang; University of Western Ontario
Janis Oram Cardy; University of Western Ontario
Devin M Casenhiser; University of Tennessee
Stuart G Shanker; York University
Amanda Binns; University of Western Ontario

Parents and primary caregivers provide a key source of linguistic input early in the developmental process. The Milton and Ethel Harris Research Initiative Treatment (MEHRIT) is a developmental social pragmatic intervention that provides parents with training on supporting their child’s communication development. This study investigated whether MEHRIT training was associated with changes in parent language use following treatment. Preschool-aged children with ASD and their parents participated in a randomized controlled trial. Fifteen minute parent-child interactions were videotaped pre-treatment and post-treatment, twelve months apart, and each parent utterance was assigned a code indicating its main function. Parents in the MEHRIT group outperformed the control group post-treatment in the use of skills taught by MEHRIT, using significantly more commenting and significantly fewer metalinguistic questions. Results of this study offer support for parent-implemented therapies, suggesting that parents have the potential to apply strategies obtained from coaching in the facilitation of communication with their children.

This research was funded by: Harris Steel Foundation, Unicorn Foundation, Cure Autism Now, Public Health Agency of Canada, and Templeton Foundation

SOP3-2

A Multi-method Approach to Characterizing Pragmatic Development in Individuals with Down Syndrome

Michelle Lee; Northwestern University
Lauren Bush; Northwestern University
Gary Martin; St. John's University
Molly Losh; Northwestern University

This longitudinal study examined pragmatic language development and related abilities in boys and girls with Down Syndrome (DS), utilizing a multi-method design combining parent report, standardized assessment, and clinical ratings of semi-structured conversational interactions. Controlling for mental age, receptive and expressive vocabulary, and mean length of utterance (MLU), results indicated that across all time points, individuals with DS had greater difficulty than younger typically developing controls on parent-report and standardized measures; however, there were no differences on more detailed ratings of pragmatic violations during semi-naturalistic conversation. Individuals with DS demonstrated gradual improvements in pragmatic language but at a rate slower than controls. Analysis of the semi-naturalistic samples revealed considerable heterogeneity in patterns of change. Mental age, MLU, expressive and receptive vocabulary, theory of mind, and executive functioning correlated with pragmatic abilities, although these relationships varied by sampling context, highlighting the complex profile of skills underlying pragmatic development in DS.
Funding for this study was provided by R01 HD038819, R01 HD044935, P30 HD03110.