4.2 Article

Maximum repetition rate in a large cross-sectional sample of typically developing Dutch-speaking children

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17549507.2020.1865458

Keywords

maximum repetition rate; diadochokinesis; speech development; motor speech; normative data; children

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study aimed to provide normative data for maximum repetition rate (MRR) development of Dutch-speaking children aged 3 to 6 years. Results showed that MRR scores were influenced by age group, gender, and MRR sequences, with boys scoring higher than girls across all sequences.
Purpose: The current study aims to provide normative data for the maximum repetition rate (MRR) development of Dutch-speaking children based on a large cross-sectional study using a standardised protocol. Method: A group of 1014 typically developing children aged 3;0 to 6;11 years performed the MRR task of the Computer Articulation Instrument (CAI). The number of syllables per second was calculated for mono-, bi-, and trisyllabic sequences (MRR-pa, MRR-ta, MRR-ka, MRR-pata, MRR-taka, MRR-pataka). A two-way mixed ANOVA was conducted to compare the effects of age and gender on MRR scores in different MRR sequences. Result: The data analysis showed that overall MRR scores were affected by age group, gender and MRR sequence. For all MRR sequences the MRR increased significantly with age. MRR-pa was the fastest sequence, followed by respectively MRR-ta, MRR-pata, MRR-taka, MRR-ka and MRR-pataka. Overall MRR scores were higher for boys than for girls, for all MRR sequences. Conclusion: This study presents normative data of MRR of Dutch-speaking children aged 3;0 to 6;11 years. These norms might be useful in clinical practice to differentiate children with speech sound disorders from typically developing children. More research on this topic is necessary. It is also suggested to collect normative data for other individual languages, using the same protocol.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available