American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology Vol.12 282-288 August 2003. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2003/074)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wolfe, V.
Right arrow Articles by Mesaris, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wolfe, V.
Right arrow Articles by Mesaris, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Importance of Sound Identification Training in Phonological Intervention

Virginia Wolfe 1
Cynthia Presley 1

Jennifer Mesaris 1
1 Auburn University Montgomery, Montgomery, AL

viwolfe{at}mindspring.com

Little is known about the relevance of sound identification training in phonological intervention. Some treatment approaches incorporate sound identification training; others do not. The purpose of the present study was to compare articulatory improvement following treatment with and without sound identification training. Nine preschool children with severe phonological disorders were randomly assigned to 2 groups for the treatment of stimulable sound errors: (a) mixed training with concurrent production and sound identification training and (b) production-only training. Articulatory improvement was evaluated as a function of treatment type and pretraining sound identification scores. No overall difference was found between the 2 treatment types except for sounds that had been poorly identified. Articulatory errors with low identification scores made greater progress after receiving mixed training with both production and sound identification training. For error sounds receiving production training, significant relationships were found between both pre- and posttraining identification scores and articulatory improvement, suggesting (a) that perception of error sounds prior to treatment may affect degree of improvement and (b) that production training may improve perception of error sounds. Different views exist with regard to the targeting of stimulable error sounds for treatment. Results of the present study suggest that sound identification in addition to stimulability may be an important consideration in target selection as well as treatment mode.

Key Words: speech disorders, phonology, speech perception, phonological intervention

Submitted on March 19, 2001
Accepted on November 13, 2002


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 LSHSSHome page
E. Baker and S. McLeod
Evidence-Based Practice for Children With Speech Sound Disorders: Part 1 Narrative Review
Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, April 1, 2011; 42(2): 102 - 139.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJSLPHome page
C. J. Johnson
Getting Started in Evidence-Based Practice for Childhood Speech-Language Disorders
Am J Speech Lang Pathol, February 1, 2006; 15(1): 20 - 35.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]