Study shows children with developmental language disorder lag in personal narrative skills, suggesting memory and socio-emotional traits are crucial.
Purpose: Personal narrative production, or the ability to talk about past events that have been personally experienced, relies on a wide range of linguistic skills and is influenced by memory and socio-emotional traits. This study investigated the predictive role of memory mechanisms and socio-emotional functioning on personal narrative production in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) compared to children with typical language development (TLD). Method: Fifty 9- to 11-year-old Croatian-speaking children with DLD and 50 gender-matched peers with TLD narrated personal narratives elicited through emotion-based prompts using the Global TALES (Talking About Lived Experiences in Stories) protocol. Children's narratives were analyzed at linguistic, propositional, macrostructure-planning, and pragmatic levels. Children were also assessed using measures of memory mechanisms, including the episodic buffer, and semantic access and fluency, as well as measures of socio-emotional functioning using the Beck Youth Inventory. Results: Results showed significant group differences in personal narrative production, with the DLD group demonstrating lower performance than the TLD group. It was found that episodic buffer, followed by anxiety, played a predictive role in personal narrative production, but group membership (DLD vs. TLD) did not moderate this variance. Conclusions: These findings highlight the important contribution of nonlinguistic skills, including anxiety symptoms and the episodic buffer, in organizing information necessary for the construction of personal narratives at the individual level, regardless of group membership. This increased understanding of linguistic and nonlinguistic skills contributing to personal narrative performance has the potential to influence assessment and intervention practices for children with DLD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gabaj et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: