Differential Language Markers of Pathology in Autism, Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified and Specific Language Impairment

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Author(s): Demouy, Julie; Plaza, Monique; Xavier, Jean
  • Language:
    English
  • Source:
    Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders. Oct-Dec 2011 5(4):1402-1412.
  • Physical Description:
    PDF
  • Publication Date:
    2011
  • Document Type:
    Journal Articles
    Reports - Research
  • Additional Information
    • Availability:
      Elsevier. 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32887-4800. Tel: 877-839-7126; Tel: 407-345-4020; Fax: 407-363-1354; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.elsevier.com
    • Peer Reviewed:
      Y
    • Source:
      11
    • Subject Terms:
      Age; Intonation; Phonology; Syntax; Pervasive Developmental Disorders; Language Impairments; Imitation; Pathology; Raw Scores; Expressive Language; Autism; Control Groups; Comparative Analysis; Vocabulary; Language Skills; Pragmatics; Correlation
    • Accession Number:
      10.1016/j.rasd.2011.01.026
    • ISSN:
      1750-9467
    • Abstract:
      Language impairment is a common core feature in Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD) and Specific Language Impairment (SLI). Many studies have tried to define the specific language profiles of these disorders, some claiming the existence of overlaps, and others conceiving of them as separate categories. Fewer have sought to determine whether and how PDD-NOS language profile, including prosody, differs from those of Autistic Disorder (AD) and SLI. Here, 12 children with AD (mean age 9.75; sd 3.5), 10 with PDD-NOS (mean age 9.83; sd 2.17), and 13 children with SLI (mean age 9.17; sd 3.9) matched for age, sex and academic skills were explored for both receptive and expressive language skills. Prosody was also assessed with an intonation imitation task analyzed through automatic speech processing and compared to 70 typical developing controls matched for age and sex. A similar delay in phonology and vocabulary was observed in the three groups as were significant but variable differences between the groups in syntax, pragmatics and prosody. SLI showed correlations between chronological age and raw scores in all language tasks, while AD and PDD-NOS did not. Furthermore, SLI showed correlation within all raw scores in language tasks. Most of those correlations were also found in PDD-NOS but not in AD. In conclusion, these findings support the hypothesis that language skills in AD and SLI rely on different mechanisms, while PDD-NOS show an intermediate profile sharing some characteristics of both AD and SLI. They also suggest that expressive syntax, pragmatic skills and some intonation features could be considered as language differential markers of pathology, challenging the DSM-V proposal of broad criteria. (Contains 1 figure and 4 tables.)
    • Abstract:
      As Provided
    • Publication Date:
      2011
    • Accession Number:
      EJ927536