Home language environment and brain functions for language Irina Kuzmina, Amanda Hampton Wray, Eric...
-
Upload
roderick-young -
Category
Documents
-
view
229 -
download
0
Transcript of Home language environment and brain functions for language Irina Kuzmina, Amanda Hampton Wray, Eric...
Home language environment and brain functions for language
Irina Kuzmina, Amanda Hampton Wray, Eric Pakulak, Yoshiko Yamada, & Helen Neville
Brain Development Laboratory, University of Oregon Department of Psychology
Home language environment & Language Development
Home language environment has substantial effects on a child’s language development.
Language skills are important for:• academic achievement
(e.g. reading, and math abilities)
Hart & Risley, 1995; Hoff, 2003 Huttenlocher, Vasilyeva, Cymerman, & Levine, 2002, Catts, Adlof, & Weismer, 2006; Pagani, Fitzpatrick, Archambault, & Janosz, 2010
Home Language and Vocabulary Development
Hart & Risley, 1992; Hart & Risley, 2003
480 utterances per hour
300 utterances per hour
175 utterances per hour
Averaged across2.5 years of observation
Goal is to explore the relationship between:
parent language input:how much time parents spend reading to and sharing books with their children;
language proficiency: a standardized measure of receptive language;
neurophysiological measure: event-related brain potentials (ERPs)
What are event-related potentials (ERPs)?
Continuous brain electrical activity
Time-locked to the presentation of stimuli of interest
Online, non-invasive
index of cognitive processes
Temporal resolution of milliseconds
Electro-Cap
32-channel;gel for conduction
Collecting ERP data
Amplifier
EEG: Electroencephalogram
s21s11 s12 s13... s22
ERPs time locked to the onset of critical words
Brain Organization for Language
Language has different components and ERPs are sensitive to different subcomponents of language: • Phonology• Syntax• Semantics
Canonical: She claps her hands happily.
Violation: She claps her ball happily.
Focus on Semantics Processing
Negatively going wave Response to violations of semantic expectations Largest over central and parietal electrode sites
N400
ERPs and language processing “Mature” N400 (adults): shorter duration, focal
distribution
N400 (young children): prolonged latency, more spread
Current Project
Brain organization and processing for language are related to experience and language proficiency.
Research question:How does parent and child joint reading relate to neural processing for semantics?
Hypothesis:Children with higher reading input will display more mature N400. Pakulak & Neville, 2010; Yamada, Harris, Pakulak, Schachter, Neville, 2002, Hampton Wray & Weber-Fox, under revision
Method
ERPs were recorded for 3-5 year-old children (N = 35)
Questionnaires completed by parents: self-report of parent reading and sharing books with their children
Median split: high and low reading input groups
Groups were matched on receptive language proficiency.
Paradigm for assessing brain functions for language using ERPs
child-friendlyecologically validhighly engaging
ResultsParadigm validity:
Children (3-5 year old)
Adults
Replicated previous resultsSignificant N400 in time windows 350-950 ms
and 950-1600 ms
N400 N400
Group Differences
High Reading Input
Low Reading Input
No differences in mean amplitudes in time windows 350-950 ms or 950-1600 ms
Late time window (1600-2300 ms): distribution difference
Results: distribution difference
Low reading group shows a negativity that is more broadly distributed in the late time window
High reading group: negativity only over right hemisphere (condition by hemisphere interaction, p = ,03)
Low reading group: negativity over both hemispheres (no condition by hemisphere interaction, p = .43)
Discussion
We may not see differences in the earlier time windows because groups were matched for language proficiency.
Right-lateralized pattern, observed in the high reading input group in the late time window resembles the N400 distribution typically found in adults.
The bilateral distribution observed in the low reading input group may suggest recruitment of additional systems for language processing, that usually are not related to semantic processing.
Acknowledgments
Brain Development Laboratory UO Summer Program for Undergraduate Research (SPUR) NIH/NIDCD R01 DC00481-21