Purpose: The Index of Productive Syntax (IPSyn; Scarborough, 1990) is widely used to measure syntax production in young children. The goal of this article is to promote greater clarity and consistency in machine and hand scoring by presenting a revised version of the IPSyn (IPSyn-R) and comparing it with the original IPSyn (IPSyn-O). Method: Longitudinal syntax production in 10 30- and 42-month-old typically developing children drawn from the Child Language Data Exchange System (MacWhinney, 2000) Weismer corpus was examined, using both the IPSyn-O and the IPSyn-R. Results: The IPSyn-R provided nearly identical scores to the IPSyn-O with the exception of scores affected primarily by 1 modified noun phrase structure. Structures ranked as more advanced were produced less frequently. The results also reveal which of the IPSyn-R's 59 structures were most and least likely to be produced by this sample at these ages. Conclusions: The qualitative and quantitative differences between the IPSyn-O and the IPSyn-R are relatively minor. The IPSyn-R can make it easier to score the IPSyn, both by clinicians and researchers, and facilitate the IPSyn's move to machine scoring of language samples.
Purpose: The Index of Productive Syntax (IPSyn; Scarborough, 1990) is widely used to measure syntax production in young children. The goal of this article is to promote greater clarity and consistency in machine and hand scoring by presenting a revised version of the IPSyn (IPSyn-R) and comparing it with the original IPSyn (IPSyn-O). Method: Longitudinal syntax production in 10 30- and 42-month-old typically developing children drawn from the Child Language Data Exchange System (MacWhinney, 2000) Weismer corpus was examined, using both the IPSyn-O and the IPSyn-R. Results: The IPSyn-R provided nearly identical scores to the IPSyn-O with the exception of scores affected primarily by 1 modified noun phrase structure. Structures ranked as more advanced were produced less frequently. The results also reveal which of the IPSyn-R's 59 structures were most and least likely to be produced by this sample at these ages. Conclusions: The qualitative and quantitative differences between the IPSyn-O and the IPSyn-R are relatively minor. The IPSyn-R can make it easier to score the IPSyn, both by clinicians and researchers, and facilitate the IPSyn's move to machine scoring of language samples.
Authors: Brian MacWhinney; Jenny A Roberts; Evelyn P Altenberg; Madison Hunter Journal: Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch Date: 2020-09-21 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Courtney Overton; Taylor Baron; Barbara Zurer Pearson; Nan Bernstein Ratner Journal: Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch Date: 2021-01-18 Impact factor: 2.983