Journal of developmental and behavioral pediatrics : JDBP · 2021
Association Between Symbolic Play and Language: A Comparison Between Typically Developing Children and Children with Down Syndrome.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Joginder Singh Susheel, Gan Brenda, Chu Shin Ying
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Language and symbolic play require the same underlying symbolic ability and develop parallel to one another. The aim of this study was to determine the association between symbolic play and vocabulary in typically developing children and children with Down syndrome in Malaysia.
METHODS: Twenty-five typically developing children and 25 children with Down syndrome aged between 12 and 36 months were involved in this study. They were recruited from an early intervention center and various kindergartens from the West Coast of Peninsular Malaysia. Their play skills were assessed using the Symbolic Play Test Second Edition, and information about their vocabulary was obtained through the MacArthur Bates Communicative Development Inventories that was filled out by their parents.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the vocabulary and symbolic play scores of children with Down syndrome compared with typically developing children. There was also a positive correlation between symbolic play scores and receptive and expressive vocabulary scores for both groups of children.
CONCLUSION: When providing intervention, speech-language pathologists need to promote the development of symbolic play in addition to language, given the association between the two. They should also look into introducing an augmentative and alternative communication system to the children who demonstrate age-appropriate symbolic play skills but have trouble with symbolic language production.
METHODS: Twenty-five typically developing children and 25 children with Down syndrome aged between 12 and 36 months were involved in this study. They were recruited from an early intervention center and various kindergartens from the West Coast of Peninsular Malaysia. Their play skills were assessed using the Symbolic Play Test Second Edition, and information about their vocabulary was obtained through the MacArthur Bates Communicative Development Inventories that was filled out by their parents.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the vocabulary and symbolic play scores of children with Down syndrome compared with typically developing children. There was also a positive correlation between symbolic play scores and receptive and expressive vocabulary scores for both groups of children.
CONCLUSION: When providing intervention, speech-language pathologists need to promote the development of symbolic play in addition to language, given the association between the two. They should also look into introducing an augmentative and alternative communication system to the children who demonstrate age-appropriate symbolic play skills but have trouble with symbolic language production.