Publications

Abstract

Background

Developmental delay (DD) poses challenges to children's overall development, necessitating early detection and intervention. Existing screening tools in China focus mainly on children with developmental issues in two or more domains, diagnosed as global developmental delay (GDD). However, the recent rise of early childhood development (ECD) concepts has expanded the focus to include not only those with severe brain development impairments but also children who lag in specific domains due to various social-environmental factors, with the aim of promoting positive development through active intervention. To support this approach, corresponding screening tools need to be developed.
Methods

The current study used a two-phase design to develop and validate the Parent-Reported Indicator of Developmental Evaluation for Chinese Children (PRIDE) tool. In Phase 1, age-specific milestone forms for PRIDE were created through a survey conducted in urban and rural primary care clinics across four economic regions in China. In Phase 2, PRIDE was validated in a community-based sample. Sensitivity and specificity of both PRIDE and Ages and Stages Questionnaires (ASQ)-3 were estimated using inverse probability weights (IPW) and multiple imputation (MI) to address planned and unplanned missing data.
Results

In Phase 1 involving a total of 1160 participants aged 1 to 48 months, 63 items were selected from the initial item pool to create 10 age-specific PRIDE forms. Our Phase 2 study included 777 children within the same age range. PRIDE demonstrated an estimated sensitivity and specificity of 83.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 56.8%–100.0%] and 84.9% (95% CI: 82.8%–86.9%) in the identification of DD.
Conclusion

The findings suggest that PRIDE holds promise as a sensitive tool for detecting DD in community settings.

Abstract

Models on L3/Ln acquisition differ with respect to how they envisage degree (holistic
vs. selective transfer of the L1, L2 or both) and/or timing (initial stages vs. development) of how
the influence of source languages unfolds. This study uses EEG/ERPs to examine these models,
bringing together two types of bilinguals: heritage speakers (HSs) (Italian-German, n = 15) compared
to adult L2 learners (L1 German, L2 English, n = 28) learning L3/Ln Latin. Participants were trained
on a selected Latin lexicon over two sessions and, afterward, on two grammatical properties: case
(similar between German and Latin) and adjective–noun order (similar between Italian and Latin).
Neurophysiological findings show an N200/N400 deflection for the HSs in case morphology and a
P600 effect for the German L2 group in adjectival position. None of the current L3/Ln models predict
the observed results, which questions the appropriateness of this methodology. Nevertheless, the
results are illustrative of differences in how HSs and L2 learners approach the very initial stages of
additional language learning, the implications of which are discussed

Abstract

The present study uses EEG time-frequency representations (TFRs) with a Flanker task to investigate if and how individual differences in bilingual language experience modulate neurocognitive outcomes (oscillatory dynamics) in two bilingual group types: late bilinguals (L2 learners) and early bilinguals (heritage speakers—HSs). TFRs were computed for both incongruent and congruent trials. The difference between the two (Flanker effect vis-à-vis cognitive interference) was then (1) compared between the HSs and the L2 learners, (2) modeled as a function of individual differences with bilingual experience within each group separately and (3) probed for its potential (a)symmetry between brain and behavioral data. We found no differences at the behavioral and neural levels for the between-groups comparisons. However, oscillatory dynamics (mainly theta increase and alpha suppression) of inhibition and cognitive control were found to be modulated by individual differences in bilingual language experience, albeit distinctly within each bilingual group. While the results indicate adaptations toward differential brain recruitment in line with bilingual language experience variation overall, this does not manifest uniformly. Rather, earlier versus later onset to bilingualism—the bilingual type—seems to constitute an independent qualifier to how individual differences play out.

Abstract

Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field.