The extragalactic Universe: an alternative view

H. Arp,Geoffrey Burbidge,Fred Hoyle,J. Narlikar,N. Wickramasinghe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/346807A0

IF: 64.8

1990-08-30

Nature

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

How do minimally verbal children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder use communicative gestures to complement their spoken language abilities?

Chelsea La Valle,Karen Chenausky,Helen Tager-Flusberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23969415211035065

2021-01-01

Abstract:Background and aims Prior work has examined how children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder who are minimally verbal use their spoken language abilities during interactions with others. However, social communication includes other aspects beyond speech. To our knowledge, no studies have examined how minimally verbal children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder are using their gestural communication during social interactions. Such work can provide important insights into how gestures may complement their spoken language abilities. Methods Fifty minimally verbal children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder participated ( M age = 12.41 years; 38 males). Gestural communication was coded from the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule. Children ( n = 25) and adolescents ( n = 25) were compared on their production of gestures, gesture–speech combinations, and communicative functions. Communicative functions were also assessed by the type of communication modality: gesture, speech, and gesture–speech to examine the range of communicative functions across different modalities of communication. To explore the role gestures may play the relation between speech utterances and gestural production was investigated. Results Analyses revealed that (1) minimally verbal children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder did not differ in their total number of gestures. The most frequently produced gesture across children and adolescents was a reach gesture, followed by a point gesture (deictic gesture), and then conventional gestures. However, adolescents produced more gesture–speech combinations (reinforcing gesture-speech combinations) and displayed a wider range of communicative functions. (2) Overlap was found in the types of communicative functions expressed across different communication modalities. However, requests were conveyed via gesture more frequently compared to speech or gesture–speech. In contrast, dis/agree/acknowledging and responding to a question posed by the conversational partner was expressed more frequently via speech compared to gesture or gesture–speech. (3) The total number of gestures was negatively associated with total speech utterances after controlling for chronological age, receptive communication ability, and nonverbal IQ. Conclusions Adolescents may be employing different communication strategies to maintain the conversational exchange and to further clarify the message they want to convey to the conversational partner. Although overlap occurred in communicative functions across gesture, speech, and gesture–speech, nuanced differences emerged in how often they were expressed across different modalities of communication. Given their speech production abilities, gestures may play a compensatory role for some individuals with autism spectrum disorder who are minimally verbal. Implications Findings underscore the importance of assessing multiple modalities of communication to provide a fuller picture of their social communication abilities. Our results identified specific communicative strengths and areas for growth that can be targeted and expanded upon within gesture and speech to optimize social communication development.
Does Gestural Communication Influence Later Spoken Language Ability in Minimally Verbal Autistic Children?

Chelsea La Valle,Lue Shen,Wendy Shih,Connie Kasari,Stephanie Shire,Catherine Lord,Helen Tager-Flusberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_jslhr-23-00433

2024-06-13

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research

Abstract:Purpose: The current study examined the predictive role of gestures and gesture–speech combinations on later spoken language outcomes in minimally verbal (MV) autistic children enrolled in a blended naturalistic developmental/behavioral intervention (Joint Attention, Symbolic Play, Engagement, and Regulation [JASPER] + Enhanced Milieu Teaching [EMT]). Method: Participants were 50 MV autistic children (40 boys), ages 54–105 months ( M = 75.54, SD = 16.45). MV was defined as producing fewer than 20 spontaneous, unique, and socially communicative words. Autism symptom severity (Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule–Second Edition) and nonverbal cognitive skills (Leiter-R Brief IQ) were assessed at entry. A natural language sample (NLS), a 20-min examiner–child interaction with specified toys, was collected at entry (Week 1) and exit (Week 18) from JASPER + EMT intervention. The NLS was coded for gestures (deictic, conventional, and representational) and gesture–speech combinations (reinforcing, disambiguating, supplementary, other) at entry and spoken language outcomes: speech quantity (rate of speech utterances) and speech quality (number of different words [NDW] and mean length of utterance in words [MLUw]) at exit using European Distributed Corpora Project Linguistic Annotator and Systematic Analysis of Language Transcripts. Results: Controlling for nonverbal IQ and autism symptom severity at entry, rate of gesture–speech combinations (but not gestures alone) at entry was a significant predictor of rate of speech utterances and MLUw at exit. The rate of supplementary gesture–speech combinations, in particular, significantly predicted rate of speech utterances and NDW at exit. Conclusion: These findings highlight the critical importance of gestural communication, particularly gesture–speech (supplementary) combinations in supporting spoken language development in MV autistic children.

rehabilitation,audiology & speech-language pathology,linguistics
Do Spoken Vocabulary and Gestural Production Distinguish Children with Transient Language Delay from Children Who Will Show Developmental Language Disorder? A Pilot Study

Pasquale Rinaldi,Arianna Bello,Francesca Romana Lasorsa,Maria Cristina Caselli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19073822

IF: 4.614

2022-03-23

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract:The literature on the role of gestures in children with language delay (LD) is partial and controversial. The present study explores gestural production and modality of expression in children with LD and semantic and temporal relationships between gestures and words in gesture + word combinations. Thirty-three children participated (mean age, 26 months), who were recruited through a screening programme for LD. Cognitive skills, lexical abilities, and the use of spontaneous gestures in a naming task were evaluated when the children were 32 months old. When the children were 78 months old, their parents were interviewed to collect information about an eventual diagnosis of developmental language disorder (DLD). According to these data, the children fell into three groups: children with typical development (n = 13), children with LD who did not show DLD (transient LD; n = 9), and children with LD who showed DLD (n = 11). No significant differences emerged between the three groups for cognitive and lexical skills (comprehension and production), for number of gestures spontaneously produced, and for the sematic relationships between gestures and words. Differences emerged in the modality of expression, where children with transient LD produced more unimodal gestural utterances than typical-development children, and in the temporal relationships between gestures and words, where the children who would show DLD provided more frequent representational gestures before the spoken answer than typical-development children. We suggest a different function for gestures in children with T-LD, who used representational gestures to replace the spoken word they were not yet able to produce, and in children with LD-DLD, who used representational gestures to access spoken words.

public, environmental & occupational health,environmental sciences
The Role of Gesture in Language Development for Neurotypical Children and Children With or at Increased Likelihood of Autism

Boin Choi,Meredith L. Rowe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12723

IF: 3.265

2024-02-22

Topics in Cognitive Science

Abstract:For young children, gesture is found to precede and predict language development. However, we are still building a knowledge base about the specific nature of the relationship between gesture and speech. While much of the research on this topic has been conducted with neurotypical children, there is a growing body of work with children who have or are at increased likelihood of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Here, we summarize the literature on relations between gesture and speech, including the role of child gesture production as well as that of gesture exposure (caregiver gesture). We include literature on both neurotypical children and children with or at likelihood of ASD, highlight the similarities and differences across populations, and offer implications for research as well as early identification and intervention.

psychology, experimental
Task‐related differences in the gesture production of young autistic children

Adrienne De Froy,Pamela Rosenthal Rollins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.13033

2024-04-06

International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders

Abstract:Background In typically developing (TD) children, gesture emerges around 9 months of age, allowing children to communicate prior to speech. Due to the important role gesture plays in the early communication of autistic and TD children, various tasks have been used to assess gesture ability. However, few data exist on whether and how tasks differentially elicit gesture, particularly for samples of racially and ethnically diverse autistic children. Aims In this study, we explored if task (a naturalistic parent–child interaction [NPCI]; structured assessment of child communication) differentially elicited rate or type of gesture production for young autistic children. Methods and procedures This secondary analysis included baseline data from 80 racially and ethnically diverse autistic children aged 18–59 months who participated in one of two larger studies. Video recordings of NPCIs and an assessment of child communication with standardised administration procedures were collected at baseline. Child gesture rate (number of gestures produced per 10 min) and type were extracted from these recordings and analysed. Outcomes and results The structured assessment elicited more gestures than the NPCI. In terms of gesture type, points, gives, and reaches accounted for 76% of child gestures. Points (which are developmentally more advanced than reaches and gives) were produced at the highest rates within book exploration. Distal points (which are more developmentally advanced than proximal or contact points) were produced at the highest rates when children were tempted to request. Conclusions and implications Our findings indicate elicitation tasks differentially elicit type and rate of gesture for young autistic children. To assess the gesture production of young autistic children, a structured task designed to elicit child requests will probe the developmental sophistication of the child's gesture repertoire, eliciting both the most gestures and the most developmentally advanced gestures. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject Because of the importance of gesture in early communication for autistic and typically developing children, various tasks have been used to assess it. However, little is known about whether tasks differentially elicit type or rate of gesture for young autistic children from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. What this paper adds to existing knowledge Elicitation tasks differentially elicit type and rate of gesture for young autistic children in the early stages of gesture. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? We recommend a structured task designed to elicit child requests to assess the developmental sophistication of a child's gesture repertoire.

rehabilitation,audiology & speech-language pathology,linguistics
The Key Role of Gestures in Spatial Tasks for Students With Intellectual Disability

Noémie Lacombe,Thierry Dias,Geneviève Petitpierre

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-129.6.460

2024-11-01

Abstract:The gestures produced by children with intellectual disability (ID) in spatial tasks are rarely considered, although they have a supporting role in the formation of thought. In this research study, we analyzed the number of gestures, the type of gestures, and their role in the expression of knowledge of students with ID. Twenty students (12-17 years old) with ID and 40 students with typical development (TD) matched on visual-spatial level (n = 20) and on language level (n = 20) participated in the research. Students with ID made significantly more gestures in relation to the number of words spoken compared to their peers with TD. Thirty percent of the expressive communication of students with ID came from gestures alone, and 60% of the responses contained at least one gesture. Finally, the higher the level of task difficulty, the more gestures the students made.
Relationship Between Gestures and Vocabulary in 14‐Month‐Old Swedish‐Learning Children

Ulrika Marklund,Ellen Marklund,Lisa Gustavsson,Christina Samuelsson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.13077

2024-10-25

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology

Abstract:In this study, the relationship between gestures and vocabulary size in 177 Swedish‐learning 14‐month‐old children was examined. Gesture use, receptive, and expressive vocabulary were reported by caregivers with the Swedish version of the MacArthur Bates Communicative Developmental Inventory, words and gestures, SECDI‐1. Gesture types examined were referential gestures classified as either deictic gestures, conventional gestures, and object actions. A fine‐grained analysis of gestures and lexicon was performed. Results show that percentage of gestures used by children significantly predicts percentage of words in their receptive vocabulary. However, looking at gesture type, only use of object actions significantly predicts percentage of words in the receptive vocabulary whereas use of conventional gestures does not. Deictic gestures showed a ceiling effect and were therefore not further used for analysis. The relationship between gesture use and vocabulary size was not impacted by semantic category (food or clothes). Vocabulary in both semantic categories was statistically predicted by object actions in only one semantic category.

psychology, multidisciplinary
[Carbohydrate metabolism in the small intestine].

H. Inui,Y. Nakano

2002-07-01

Abstract:
Examining Gesture Production in the Presence of Communication Challenges

Laura M Morett,Laura M. Morett

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3791/66256

2024-01-26

Journal of Visualized Experiments

Abstract:Understanding why speakers modify their co-speech hand gestures when speaking to interlocutors provides valuable insight into how these gestures contribute to interpersonal communication in face-to-face and virtual contexts. The current protocols manipulate the visibility of speakers and their interlocutors in tandem in a face-to-face context to examine the impact of visibility on gesture production when communication is challenging. In these protocols, speakers complete tasks such as teaching words from an unfamiliar second language or recounting the events of cartoon vignettes to an interlocutor who is either another participant or a confederate. When performing these tasks, speakers are visible or non-visible to their interlocutor, and the speaker is visible or non-visible to the participant. In the word learning task, speakers and interlocutors visible to one another produce more representational gestures, which convey meaning via handshape and motion, and deictic (pointing) gestures than speakers and interlocutors who are not visible to one another. In the narrative retelling protocol, adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) produced more gestures when speaking to visible interlocutors than non-visible interlocutors. A major strength of the current protocol is its flexibility in terms of the tasks, populations, and gestures examined, and the current protocol can be implemented in videoconferencing as well as face-to-face contexts. Thus, the current protocol has the potential to advance the understanding of gesture production by elucidating its role in interpersonal communication in populations with communication challenges.

multidisciplinary sciences
Deliberate synchronization of speech and gesture: effects of neurodiversity and development

Inge-Marie Eigsti,Wim Pouw

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2024.33

2024-09-26

Language and Cognition

Abstract:The production of speech and gesture is exquisitely temporally coordinated. In autistic individuals, speech-gesture synchrony during spontaneous discourse is disrupted. To evaluate whether this asynchrony reflects motor coordination versus language production processes, the current study examined deliberately performed hand movements during speech in youth with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) compared to neurotypical youth. Neurotypical adult performance provided a mature baseline. Participants read aloud rhythmic nursery rhymes, while producing a beat-like hand movement. An automated pixel-change video measure identified kinematic peaks; using smoothed acoustic envelope analyses, we identified peaks in speech. Results indicated few diagnostic group differences in explicit speech-movement coordination, although adolescent performance differed from adults. Adults demonstrated higher tempo and greater rhythmicity in their coordination; this group difference suggests that the method is sufficiently subtle to reveal individual differences and that this form of complex coordination undergoes ongoing maturation beyond adolescence. The sample is small, and thus results are necessarily preliminary. In the context of prior speech-gesture coordination studies, these findings of intact synchrony are consistent with the hypothesis that it is the demands of discourse planning, rather than motor coordination, that have led to prior findings of asynchrony during spontaneous speech; this possibility awaits future research.

psychology, experimental,linguistics
Improving Language Comprehension via Hand Gestures in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders and/or Language Impairment in Rural Montana

Nadezhda (Nadya) N. Modyanova,Addy P. Bolton,Carter Storrusten,Bernadette McCrory

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2327857924131012

2024-06-01

Proceedings of the International Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care

Abstract:Background: Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) and Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) are lifelong challenges, dramatically impairing communicative abilities with long term impacts on outcomes. Children with DLD and/or ASD benefit from interventions to improve language skills, but those are hard to reach in rural areas. Caregiver hand gestures can improve comprehension of content words in DLD/ASD via multimodal processing. However, little is known about how gestures affect comprehension of grammatical determiners (e.g., “ the” or “ an”). Methods: We investigate whether combining determiner phrases (e.g., “ the apple” or “ another apple”) with specific gestures (signs for [same] or [different] from American Sign Language) can improve language comprehension in hearing children with DLD/ASD, compared to TD controls. Operating Gazepoint or Tobii eye tracking at participants’ homes or a university space, we use a constrained act-out task presented via a custom-made interactive computer game with pre-recorded video prompts, or a toy and paper version, using a pretest-training-test-posttest protocol. Results: After evaluating 35 participants with ASD, DLD, and TD, ages 2-31, we identified three subgroups (across diagnoses) based on their knowledge of determiners at pretest. 51% of participants showed good (adult-like) knowledge across determiners and tests. 26% of participants were unable to complete our interactive game. However, 23% of participants showed initial poor knowledge of “ the”, followed by improvements in the comprehension of “ the” with gestures in the test, which were mostly retained in the posttest. Eye tracking demonstrated consistency between children’s attention to gestures and answers and their behavioral responses. Conclusion: Hand gestures can improve language comprehension in some children with DLD/ASD and TD. Our findings may lead to designing an inclusive intervention, for both children and their caregivers, to improve communication using multiple modalities – both speech and simple gestures which emphasize the main points of the spoken message, thereby supporting rural & underserved families.
Learning Stories Through Gesture: Gesture’s Effects on Child and Adult Narrative Comprehension

Nicole Dargue,Naomi Sweller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09505-0

IF: 8.24

2019-08-26

Educational Psychology Review

Abstract:Through providing an external support to speech, gesture observation may benefit a student's learning in a variety of areas, including narrative comprehension. Across two studies, we investigated factors that could moderate when gestures are most beneficial to narrative comprehension, including gesture type, task difficulty, and age, in order to help determine when gestures benefit narrative comprehension most. Crucially, observing typical gestures significantly benefited narrative comprehension (measured by specific questions relating to gesture points) compared with atypical or no gestures, which did not differ significantly. When measured through free recall and specific questions, these effects were not moderated by total task difficulty or age. This finding suggests that how beneficial a gesture is for narrative comprehension may depend more on the kind of gesture observed rather than on age or the difficulty of the task. It may be that typical gestures benefit narrative comprehension more than atypical gestures due to the typical gestures being more semantically related to accompanying speech. In a second study, typical gestures were rated as more semantically related to the speech than were atypical gestures. We argue that educators' use of typical, frequently produced iconic gestures that are adequately semantically related to speech may enhance student understanding.

psychology, educational
Persisting and gross elevation of serum carcinoembryonic antigen levels after removal of tumour bulk.

B. Cantwell,M. Duffy,J. Mehigan,J. Fennelly

Clinics in Oncology

Abstract:
Assessment and treatment of gesture in neurogenic communication disorders: An international survey of practice

Anna Caute,Abi Roper,Lucy Dipper,Brielle C. Stark

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.13136

2024-11-28

International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders

Abstract:Background Gesture and speech collaborate in conveying meaning, and gesture is often leveraged by people with neurogenic communication disorders, such as aphasia, cognitive‐communicative impairments and primary progressive aphasia, when words fail them. Because gesture is imagistic, transitory and holistic, there are inherent challenges when assessing and treating it. Aims The survey had three primary research questions: (1) what gesture assessment practices, and (2) what gesture treatment practices, are employed by speech and language therapists (SLTs) internationally; and (3) what are the factors that influence these practices? Methods and Procedures An online survey of practice using Qualtrics was piloted and then disseminated to practising SLTs working with people with neurogenic communication disorders. In addition to descriptive statistics summarising across the three research questions, statistical comparisons were made for two independent groups: primary work setting (research versus clinical), and primary work setting considering years of experience specific to neurogenic communication disorders (research, high; research, low; clinical, high; and clinical, low). Outcomes and Results A total of 130 international SLTs completed the first two parts of the survey. A total of 107 completed all four sections of the survey. Fifty percent of respondents reported assessing gesture sometimes/for some clients, with only 5% reporting that they never assessed gesture. Nearly 70% of respondents reported never using a published test to evaluate gesture, with qualitative results suggesting a lack of formal assessments. This was further highlighted by the most prominent barrier being a lack of published tests (50% of respondents said this). The primary reason for evaluating gesture was to assess nonverbal communication. There was no significant difference in gesture assessment practices across comparison groups. The research group, and those within the research group with most years of experience, tended to target gestures during treatment and write treatment goals containing gesture more than other respondents. The most common facilitator to assessing or treating gesture was that the family or individual prioritised gesture for enhancing communication (53.1% of respondents). No group differences were identified for barriers/facilitators. Conclusions and Implications Findings indicate that whilst gesture is a critical nonverbal communicative behaviour, there is an unmet need for empirical and standardised methods for assessing gesture in speech and language clinical practice and there is a lack of gesture‐specific treatment resources. SLTs working in research settings may feel more able, or have more resources, to include gesture during treatment. Essential next steps include creating empirical and standardised methods for assessing gesture in speech and language clinical practice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS What is already known on the subject Gesture is a complex and crucial aspect of communication. It is a key part of the role of speech and language therapists (SLTs), as described in clinical guidelines, to assess people with aphasia's use of gesture and consider whether it could be enhanced through treatment. What this study adds to existing knowledge This is the first international survey of practice focusing on gesture assessment and treatment. It highlights the variety of methods used by SLTs to assess and treat gesture, the importance they attach to this area and the need for standardised assessment tools and treatment resources. What are the clinical implications of this work? This study provides a comprehensive overview of practices for assessing and treating gesture in neurogenic communication disorders, as well as a list of gesture resources being actively used by clinicians and researchers. These may be useful for clinicians looking to expand their understanding of approaches and resources for assessment and treatment in this domain. The study also reports on the reasons clinicians assess gesture and the barriers and facilitators they encounter which may inform clinical practice in this area.

rehabilitation,audiology & speech-language pathology,linguistics
Exploring Individual Differences: A Case for Measuring Children's Spontaneous Gesture Production as a Predictor of Learning From Gesture Instruction

Eliza L. Congdon,Miriam A. Novack,Elizabeth M. Wakefield

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12722

IF: 3.265

2024-01-30

Topics in Cognitive Science

Abstract:Decades of research have established that learners benefit when instruction includes hand gestures. This benefit is seen when learners watch an instructor gesture, as well as when they are taught or encouraged to gesture themselves. However, there is substantial individual variability with respect to this phenomenon—not all individuals benefit equally from gesture instruction. In the current paper, we explore the sources of this variability. First, we review the existing research on individual differences that do or do not predict learning from gesture instruction, including differences that are either context‐dependent (linked to the particular task at hand) or context‐independent (linked to the learner across multiple tasks). Next, we focus on one understudied measure of individual difference: the learner's own spontaneous gesture rate. We present data showing rates of "non‐gesturers" across a number of studies and we provide theoretical motivation for why this is a fruitful area for future research. We end by suggesting ways in which research on individual differences will help gesture researchers to further refine existing theories and develop specific predictions about targeted gesture intervention for all kinds of learners.

psychology, experimental
Lexical skills and gesture use: A comparison between expressive and receptive/expressive late talkers

Caterina Verganti,Chiara Suttora,Mariagrazia Zuccarini,Arianna Aceti,Luigi Corvaglia,Arianna Bello,M Cristina Caselli,Annalisa Guarini,Alessandra Sansavini,M. Cristina Caselli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2024.104711

IF: 3

2024-05-01

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Studies on late talkers (LTs) highlighted their heterogeneity and the relevance of describing different communicative profiles.AIMS: To examine lexical skills and gesture use in expressive (E-LTs) vs. receptive-expressive (R/E-LTs) LTs through a structured task.METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Forty-six 30-month-old screened LTs were distinguished into E-LTs (n= 35) and R/E-LTs (n= 11) according to their receptive skills. Lexical skills and gesture use were assessed with a Picture Naming Game by coding answer accuracy (correct, incorrect, no response), modality of expression (spoken, spoken-gestural, gestural), type of gestures (deictic, representational), and spoken-gestural answers' semantic relationship (complementary, equivalent, supplementary).OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: R/E-LTs showed lower scores than E-LTs for noun and predicate comprehension with fewer correct answers, and production with fewer correct and incorrect answers, and more no responses. R/E-LTs also exhibited lower scores in spoken answers, representational gestures, and equivalent spoken-gestural answers for noun production and in all spoken and gestural answers for predicate production.CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings highlighted more impaired receptive and expressive lexical skills and lower gesture use in R/E-LTs compared to E-LTs, underlying the relevance of assessing both lexical and gestural skills through a structured task, besides parental questionnaires and developmental scales, to describe LTs' communicative profiles.

rehabilitation,education, special
Gesture is the primary modality for language creation

Nicolas Fay,Bradley Walker,T. Mark Ellison,Zachary Blundell,Naomi De Kleine,Murray Garde,Casey J. Lister,Susan Goldin-Meadow

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.0066

2022-03-09

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract:How language began is one of the oldest questions in science, but theories remain speculative due to a lack of direct evidence. Here, we report two experiments that generate empirical evidence to inform gesture-first and vocal-first theories of language origin; in each, we tested modern humans' ability to communicate a range of meanings (995 distinct words) using either gesture or non-linguistic vocalization. Experiment 1 is a cross-cultural study, with signal Producers sampled from Australia ( n = 30, M age = 32.63, s.d. = 12.42) and Vanuatu ( n = 30, M age = 32.40, s.d. = 11.76). Experiment 2 is a cross-experiential study in which Producers were either sighted ( n = 10, M age = 39.60, s.d. = 11.18) or severely vision-impaired ( n = 10, M age = 39.40, s.d. = 10.37). A group of undergraduate student Interpreters guessed the meaning of the signals created by the Producers ( n = 140). Communication success was substantially higher in the gesture modality than the vocal modality (twice as high overall; 61.17% versus 29.04% success). This was true within cultures, across cultures and even for the signals produced by severely vision-impaired participants. The success of gesture is attributed in part to its greater universality (i.e. similarity in form across different Producers). Our results support the hypothesis that gesture is the primary modality for language creation.
Infants who develop autism show smaller inventories of deictic and symbolic gestures at 12 months of age

Dennis Wu,Jason J. Wolff,Shruthi Ravi,Jed T. Elison,Annette Estes,Sarah Paterson,Tanya St. John,Hervé Abdi,Luke E. Moraglia,Joseph Piven,Meghan R. Swanson,for the IBIS Network

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.3092

IF: 4.7

2024-01-11

Autism Research

Abstract:Gestures are an important social communication skill that infants and toddlers use to convey their thoughts, ideas, and intentions. Research suggests that early gesture use has important downstream impacts on developmental processes, such as language learning. However, autistic children are more likely to have challenges in their gestural development. The current study expands upon previous literature on the differences in gesture use between young autistic and non‐autistic toddlers by collecting data using a parent‐report questionnaire called the MCDI–Words and Gestures at three time points, 12, 18, and 24 months of age. Results (N = 467) showed that high‐likelihood infants who later met diagnostic criteria for ASD (n = 73 HL‐ASD) have attenuated gesture growth from 12 to 24 months for both deictic gestures and symbolic gestures when compared to high‐likelihood infants who later did not meet criteria for ASD (n = 249 HL‐Neg) and low‐likelihood infants who did not meet criteria for ASD (n = 145 LL‐Neg). Other social communicative skills, like play behaviors and imitation, were also found to be impacted in young autistic children when compared to their non‐autistic peers. Understanding early differences in social communication growth before a formal autism diagnosis can provide important insights for early intervention.

psychology, developmental,behavioral sciences
Is vision necessary for the timely acquisition of language‐specific patterns in co‐speech gesture and their lack in silent gesture?

Şeyda Özçalışkan,Ché Lucero,Susan Goldin‐Meadow

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13507

IF: 3.7

2024-04-18

Developmental Science

Abstract:Blind adults display language‐specificity in their packaging and ordering of events in speech. These differences affect the representation of events in co‐speech gesture––gesturing with speech––but not in silent gesture––gesturing without speech. Here we examine when in development blind children begin to show adult‐like patterns in co‐speech and silent gesture. We studied speech and gestures produced by 30 blind and 30 sighted children learning Turkish, equally divided into 3 age groups: 5–6, 7–8, 9–10 years. The children were asked to describe three‐dimensional spatial event scenes (e.g., running out of a house) first with speech, and then without speech using only their hands. We focused on physical motion events, which, in blind adults, elicit cross‐linguistic differences in speech and co‐speech gesture, but cross‐linguistic similarities in silent gesture. Our results showed an effect of language on gesture when it was accompanied by speech (co‐speech gesture), but not when it was used without speech (silent gesture) across both blind and sighted learners. The language‐specific co‐speech gesture pattern for both packaging and ordering semantic elements was present at the earliest ages we tested the blind and sighted children. The silent gesture pattern appeared later for blind children than sighted children for both packaging and ordering. Our findings highlight gesture as a robust and integral aspect of the language acquisition process at the early ages and provide insight into when language does and does not have an effect on gesture, even in blind children who lack visual access to gesture. Research Highlights Gestures, when produced with speech (i.e., co‐speech gesture), follow language‐specific patterns in event representation in both blind and sighted children. Gestures, when produced without speech (i.e., silent gesture), do not follow the language‐specific patterns in event representation in both blind and sighted children. Language‐specific patterns in speech and co‐speech gestures are observable at the same time in blind and sighted children. The cross‐linguistic similarities in silent gestures begin slightly later in blind children than in sighted children.

psychology, experimental, developmental
Immunohistochemical and biochemical studies on the collagenous proteins of human osteosarcomas

Y. Ueda,I. Nakanishi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02890060

Virchows Archiv B Cell Pathology Including Molecular Pathology

Abstract:

The extragalactic Universe: an alternative view

How do minimally verbal children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder use communicative gestures to complement their spoken language abilities?

Does Gestural Communication Influence Later Spoken Language Ability in Minimally Verbal Autistic Children?

Do Spoken Vocabulary and Gestural Production Distinguish Children with Transient Language Delay from Children Who Will Show Developmental Language Disorder? A Pilot Study

The Role of Gesture in Language Development for Neurotypical Children and Children With or at Increased Likelihood of Autism

Task‐related differences in the gesture production of young autistic children

The Key Role of Gestures in Spatial Tasks for Students With Intellectual Disability

Relationship Between Gestures and Vocabulary in 14‐Month‐Old Swedish‐Learning Children

[Carbohydrate metabolism in the small intestine].

Examining Gesture Production in the Presence of Communication Challenges

Deliberate synchronization of speech and gesture: effects of neurodiversity and development

Improving Language Comprehension via Hand Gestures in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders and/or Language Impairment in Rural Montana

Learning Stories Through Gesture: Gesture’s Effects on Child and Adult Narrative Comprehension

Persisting and gross elevation of serum carcinoembryonic antigen levels after removal of tumour bulk.

Assessment and treatment of gesture in neurogenic communication disorders: An international survey of practice

Exploring Individual Differences: A Case for Measuring Children's Spontaneous Gesture Production as a Predictor of Learning From Gesture Instruction

Lexical skills and gesture use: A comparison between expressive and receptive/expressive late talkers

Gesture is the primary modality for language creation

Infants who develop autism show smaller inventories of deictic and symbolic gestures at 12 months of age

Is vision necessary for the timely acquisition of language‐specific patterns in co‐speech gesture and their lack in silent gesture?

Immunohistochemical and biochemical studies on the collagenous proteins of human osteosarcomas