Content and construct validation of language acquisition enunciative signs in the second year of life

Fattore, Isabela de Moraes; Moraes, Anaelena Bragança de; Crestani, Anelise Henrich; Souza, Adriano Mendonça; Souza, Ana Paula Ramos de

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original Article • CoDAS 34 (2) • 2022 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20202020252 copy

Content and construct validation of language acquisition enunciative signs in the second year of life

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Purpose

To analyze the content and construct validity of enunciative signs of language acquisition for children aged 13 to 24 months.

Methods

The signs created were subjected to an assessment of clarity and relevance by six expert judges in language acquisition from an enunciative perspective. Based on their judgment, an experimental version was produced that was applied to the analysis of videos of mother-baby / examiner interactions, lasting 15 minutes, of 77 mother-baby dyads aged 13 to 18 months and 89 dyads in the age range aged between 19 and 24 months. The validity of reliability and internal consistency was performed by analyzing 10% of the sample by two speech therapists. The construct validation was carried out by the factorial analysis carried out on the total sample. The data were analyzed in Statistica 9.1 and PASW 17.0.

Results

All signs were considered clear and relevant by the expert judges. The reliability analysis showed an almost perfect agreement (0.8 ≤ Kappa ≥ 1.0) for most signs. The internal consistency for Phase 3 showed alpha = 0.771 considered high and Phase 4 presented alpha = 0.917 bordering on very high. The factor analysis of phase 3 revealed 2 factors, explaining 59.1% of the total variance and phase 4 revealed 1 factor, explaining 75.7%.

Conclusion

Content and construct validity were observed for five of the twelve signs in Phase 3 and for all signs in Phase 4.

Keywords
Language Acquisition; Child Development; Test Validation; Risk Factors; Early Intervention

Phase 3	Description
S1	The child spontaneously and intelligibly names to the adult interlocutor objects that are absent in the context.
S2	The child spontaneously, but not intelligibly names to the adult interlocutor objects that are absent in the context, seeking in prosody a way to be understood.
S3	The child spontaneously and intelligibly names to the adult interlocutor objects, people, and actions that are present in the enunciative context.
S4	The child makes gestures trying to make themselves understood when the adult interlocutor does not understand them.
S5	The child repeats the speech of the adult interlocutor as a way to organize or reorganize their enunciation, for example, improving the syntactic or phonological form, or the choice of the lexical item, or even prosodically accentuating some item.
S6	The child converses with different adult interlocutors (father, mother, examiner).
S7	The adult interlocutor attributes a possible meaning to the child's verbal productions in a tuned way.
Phase 4	Description
S1	The child asks for objects and/or asks the adult interlocutor for clarification, marking their position as speaker.
S2	The child uses different phonemic forms to convey different meanings in their enunciation (at least two modes and two points of articulation in mono- or dissyllable productions, e.g., /ma/, /da/, /ta/, /na/, /pa/, /ba/, etc.)
S3	The child uses different forms (words) to convey different meanings in their enunciation
S4	The child combines words, directly or inversely, to convey different meanings.
S5	When the child presents verbal productions that are different from adult speech, the adult interlocutor reacts by making a neutral repair request, correctly repeating the child's speech, or offering a more adequate word.
S6	The child makes comments or qualifications of situations (e.g., it's heavy, good, bad, ok, here, there).
S7	The child demonstrates to reflect on the events through the production of statements with more than one word (e.g., “I don't know if he fell”; “Is he he coming?”)
S8	The child reformulates what they have said when the adult interlocutor does not understanding them and mark themselves
S9	When you do not understand the interlocutor's utterance
S10	The child discursively marks themselves as an “I” (using the pronoun or inflection of the verb).
S11	The child is marked by nominal or pronominal forms other than the “I” in the speech (e.g., we, yours, mine, their own name)
S12	The child inserts a previous saying (theirs or of others) or projects a future saying

Signs	Clarity Analysis								Pertinence Analysis
Phase 3	J1	J2	J3	J4	J5	J6	%SA	%PC+SA	J1	J2	J3	J4	J5	J6	%SA	%PC+SA
S1	4	5	5	4	5	5	66.7	100	4	5	5	5	5	5	83.3	100
S2	5	5	5	4	5	5	83.3	100	4	5	5	5	5	5	83.3	100
S3	4	5	5	4	5	5	66.7	100	4	5	5	5	5	5	83.3	100
S4	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100
S5	4	5	5	5	5	5	83.3	100	4	5	5	5	5	4	66.7	100
S6	5	5	5	5	5	5	100.0	100	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100
S7	4	5	4	4	4	5	33.3	100	4	5	5	5	5	5	83.3	100
Fase 4	5	5	5	3	5	5	83.3	83.3	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100
S1	5	5	4	5	5	5	83.3	100	5	5	4	5	5	5	100	100
S2	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100
S3	5	5	5	4	5	5	83.3	100	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100
S4	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100	5	5	5	5	5	1	83.3	83.3
S5	4	5	5	4	5	5	66.7	100	4	5	5	5	5	5	83.3	100
S6	5	5	5	4	5	5	83.3	100	4	5	5	5	5	5	83.3	100
S7	6	5	5	4	5	5	83.3	100	4	5	5	5	5	5	83.3	100
S8	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100
S9	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100	5	5	5	5	5	1	83.3	83.3
S10	5	5	4	5	5	5	83.33	100	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100
S11	5	5	5	1	5	5	83.33	83.33	5	5	5	4	5	5	83.3	100
S12	5	5	5	3	4	5	66.7	83.33	5	5	5	5	5	5	100	100

Phase 3	Description
S1	The child spontaneously and intelligibly names to the adult interlocutor objects that are absent in the context.
S2	The child spontaneously, but not intelligibly names to the adult interlocutor objects that are absent in the context, seeking in prosody a way to be understood.
S3	The child spontaneously and intelligibly names to the adult interlocutor objects, people, and actions that are present in the enunciative context.
S4	The child makes gestures trying to make themselves understood when the adult interlocutor does not understand them.
S5	The child repeats the speech of the adult interlocutor as a way to organize or reorganize their enunciation, for example, by improving the syntactic or phonological form, or the choice of the lexical item, or even prosodically accentuating some item.
S6	The child converses with different adult interlocutors (father, mother, examiner).
S7	The adult interlocutor attributes a possible meaning to the child's verbal productions in a tuned way.
Phase 4	Description
S1	The child asks for objects and/or asks the adult interlocutor for clarification, marking his position as speaker.
S2	The child uses different phonemic forms to convey different meanings in their enunciation (at least two articulatory modes and points of articulation, e.g., /ma/, /da/, /ta/, /na/, /pa/, /ba/)
S3	The child uses different forms (words) to convey different meanings in their enunciation (presents lexical variety)
S4	The child combines words, directly or inversely, to convey different meanings.
S5	When the child presents verbal productions that are different from adult speech, the adult interlocutor reacts by making a neutral repair request or correctly repeating the child's speech.

Signs ESLAPhase 3	% agreement	Kappa Coefficient	p-value*
S1	100	1.00	-
S2	98.7	-	-
S3	88.3	0.746	-
S4	72.7	0.357	0.001
S5	92.2	0.834	-
S6	98.7	0.971	-
S7	92.2	0.798	-
Signs ESLA Phase 4
S1	96.6	0.916	0.000
S2	98.9	0.967	0.000
S3	98.9	0.970	0.000
S4	97.8	0.954	0.000
S5	97.8	0.947	0.000

Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia Al. Jaú, 684, 7º andar, 01420-002 São Paulo - SP Brasil, Tel./Fax 55 11 - 3873-4211 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revista@codas.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Conflict of interests: nothing to declare.