Retrieval-Based Word Learning in Young Typically Developing Children and Children With Development Language Disorder II: A Comparison of Retrieval Schedules

Abstract

Purpose Retrieval practice has been found to be a powerful strategy to enhance long-term retention of new information; however, the utility of retrieval practice when teaching young children new words is largely unknown, and even less is known for young children with language impairments. The current study examined the effect of 2 different retrieval schedules on word learning at both the behavioral and neural levels. Method Participants included 16 typically developing children ( M _TD = 61.58 months) and 16 children with developmental language disorder ( M _DLD = 59.60 months). Children participated in novel word learning sessions in which the spacing of retrieval practice was manipulated: Some words were retrieved only after other words had been presented (i.e., repeated retrieval that required contextual reinstatement [RRCR]); others were taught using an immediate retrieval schedule. In Experiment 1, children's recall of the novel word labels and their meanings was tested after a 5-min delay and a 1-week delay. In Experiment 2, event-related brain potentials were obtained from a match-mismatch task utilizing the novel word stimuli. Results Experiment 1 findings revealed that children were able to label referents and to retain the novel words more successfully if the words were taught in the RRCR learning condition. Experiment 2 findings revealed that mismatching picture-word pairings elicited a robust N400 event-related brain potential only for words that were taught in the RRCR condition. In addition, children were more accurate in identifying picture-word matches and mismatches for words taught in the RRCR condition, relative to the immediate retrieval condition. Conclusions Retrieval practice that requires contextual reinstatement through spacing results in enhanced word learning and long-term retention of words. Both typically developing children and children with developmental language disorder benefit from this type of retrieval procedure. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.7927112.

Figure 1.

Word learning task design for the immediate retrieval (IR/0–0–0) learning condition and the repeated retrieval with contextual reinstatement (RRCR/0–2–2) learning condition.

Figure 2.

The mean number of items correct on the recall test of Experiment 1 at 5 min and 1 week for novel words in the repeated retrieval with contextual reinstatement (RRCR) condition and the immediate retrieval (IR) condition by the children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and the children with typical language development (TD). Error bars mark standard errors.

Figure 3.

Average trajectories for novel word form retrieval across the learning period for novel words in the immediate retrieval condition for the children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and children with typical language development (TD).

Figure 4.

The mean number of items correct on the meaning recall test of Experiment 1 at 5 min and 1 week for novel words in the repeated retrieval with contextual reinstatement (RRCR) condition and the immediate retrieval (IR) condition by the children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and the children with typical language development (TD). Error bars mark standard errors.

Figure 5.

Average trajectories for the retrieval of meaning across the learning period for novel words in the immediate retrieval condition for the children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and children with typical language development (TD).

Figure 6.

The mean number of items correctly identified on the form-referent link recognition test of Experiment 1 at the 1-week test for novel words taught in the repeated retrieval with contextual reinstatement (RRCR) condition and the immediate retrieval (IR) condition by the children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and the children with typical language development (TD). Error bars mark standard errors.

Figure 7.

Match–mismatch task procedure.

Figure 8.

Match–mismatch task waveform averages for the typically developing children and the children with developmental language disorder (DLD) for the immediate retrieval (IR) learning condition and the repeated retrieval with contextual reinstatement (RRCR) learning condition.

Figure 9.

Difference wave mean amplitudes according to learning condition and group. Circles represent the mean of the difference wave (mismatch trials – match trials) within the 500- to 700-ms analysis window for the region of interest. Error bars represent standard errors. DLD = developmental language disorder; TD = typically developing; IR = immediate retrieval; RRCR = repeated retrieval with contextual reinstatement.