E’SYCHQGENIC ARTICULATION DISORDERS RELATED TO
VERBAL SKILLS AND INTELLIGENCE AS MEASURED
BY THE WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE
FOR CHILDREN

 

Then!- for the Degree of PhD.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

Katharine Gotten Bum:
1967

 

 

 

-.W._ .‘4 ,. '
r7. . -a. ~. .

3'“. j r in n he? I

. d - ‘
1.. 4 a) 4.1. A” 2?.- )j’ "I

  

Michigan State
University

 

.Hh‘"

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled {
i

Psychogenic Articulation Disorders Related To
Verbal Skills And Intelligence As Measured
By The Wechsler Intelligence Scale
For Children

presented by

Katharine Gorrell Butler

has been accepted towards fulfillment f
of the requirements for ‘
J

Ph.D. degree inAudiologz J
and Speech Sciences

2% can.

Major 'ofessog

 

Date June 8, 1967

0-169

 

l

I”
U

,3. 'Y!
q!

1'“-.-
. ..

“u .r

m
In
'1' i
(b
(>
cf
an
O
O .,
’5

UV i.‘
‘
c"4 n ."I
u‘ fer. 0"..-
.hov
l,
O.._

‘
de.°ns

‘ 95» h .,

‘3‘ U
n
0710
y‘e 5 fl
.0. I: ”flea

fl
\.
V

4
‘z::'0r
‘
‘ ‘8 SZNy
H
‘r-
‘5 P’gia I
‘ ‘-
u e
\
fieahac
«5“, I ,
'~
I.
is
‘VIOI‘ s' l
I, ‘
L“7D
\-
Cm
““ H
‘9
‘ ~h Erk
s».
Jo‘s! a
‘43?
:-
“in
‘.
J as .
“18 a

 

 

ABSTRACT
PSYCHOGENIC ARTICULATION DISORDERS
‘RELATED TO VERBAL SKILLS AND INTELLIGENCE
AS MEASURED BY THE
‘WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR CHILDREN

by Katharine G. Butler

While there has been a considerable amount of
research in the area of speech and language in the technical.
aspects of identifying and remediating speech and language
disorders, comparatively little research has been conducted
regarding the relationship of functional articulatory
disorders and verbal skills. Furthermore, even less
research has drawn upon a standardized measurement which
yields both quantitative and qualitative data on verbal
and performance levels of functioning.

'The purpose of this study is to evaluate the
functioning of children exhibiting severe articulatory
defects in terms of their verbal skills based upon their
performance on the 11 subtests of the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for Children. The normative group of the standard-
ization sample serves as controls. The experimental group
is rigidly controlled for sex, age, degree of speech
defect, I.Q. range, peripheral auditory competency, visual-
motor skills, monolingualism, and socio—economic status.
Children exhibiting brain injury and known central nervous
system dysfunction were excluded from the experimental
sample, as were gifted and mentally retarded children.

The functional articulatory defect was characterized by a

 

 

 

 

t
s.
I
I
("t

~

IA D .lo'
‘1’”, ‘.'S
.F‘ “‘~=,.

a
*“V A--t~..~

corax‘Ih'c

Hunt-\.,.~ .

Alan
u...e encnc
VOWEQ‘ Y ,
V.UF
“‘ ‘0‘.
A
CT.

gt...

4 n
.3 ”Abby-1“
bins". Cl

1

h
n‘l'ed Do, ‘3'-
V.

C

l
5
—

 

 

 

 

 

Katharine Gorrell Butler

a minimum of 5 or more misarticulated phonemes, consistently
occurring in at least 2 of the 3 consonant positions in
single word utterances.

Each of the 50 subjects, ranging in age from 6-0 to
12-0, with a mean age of 8-0, were administered the'Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children under standardized testing
conditions. The examiner recorded all verbal and motor
responses on the protocol forms. Subjects' responses were
tabulated and the raw data for analyses consisted of 542
subtest scaled scores and 150 I.Q. scaled scores.

These 692 scores were subjected to a series of
tests of significance for the difference between the means
of the groups. It was found that there were significant
differences between the two populations in regard to both
Verbal I.Q. and several of the subtests.

A On the basis of the results, the following con-
clusions seem warranted:

1. Children with psychogenic speech defects and
those with normal speech reveal no differences in performance
in "general intelligence" on the Full Scale I.Q. as deter-
mined by the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children.

2. Children with psychogenic speech defects
reveal I.Q. scores that are significantly lower in the area

of verbal skills than do children with normal speech.

FW—F‘u—u—u—v

_J

 

(a!
0

.Fl.‘.“ v. .I-
COCO-db e. h-,

 

rimfizF,.“ -
te-.-\,_“'-J

a

v4
' '-
b~.«r-\-&-C..’

'nl‘ n A
5-.--21‘53 h'.‘

 

I
P. u
v y ‘
“--".Elc k'.
‘4
r9“.\
w‘“: S'C-c-
l»
'1
I“
“
Aug

.0' u a
." ‘er-Cv~-
-..
t.
A
‘Jr nnl‘ .
V..- a“;
\
.~
b—~.
0.:
t}: \
A. -
" C3C'Q
H‘~ :-
v

Katharine Gorrell Butler

3. Verbal subtests of the WISC, as achieved by
children with psychogenic speech defects, namely, Informa-
tion, Vocabulary, Arithmetic and Digit Span, are sig-
nificantly lower than those achieved by children with
normal speech. However, children with psychogenic speech
problems reveal significantly better performance on Picture
Completion, a subtest of the Performance Scale, than do
children with normal speech who are of average intelligence.

4. There are no significant differences between
children with psychogenic speech defects and children with
normal speech for the subtests which measure Picture
Arrangement, Block Design, Object Assembly, and Coding on
the Performance Scale of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale
for Children.

Recommendations for further research were made on

the basis of these findings.

PSYCHOGENIC ARTICULATION DISORDERS
RELATED TO VERBAL SKILLS AND INTELLIGENCE

AS MEASURED BY THE
WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR CHILDREN

by

‘x
i. v

a
(
(
Katharine G? Butler

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Speech

1967

(c) Copyright by
KATHARINE GORRELL BUTLER

1968

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My debt to many is very great:

To Dr. Charles Van Riper, who
placed my feet upon the path,

To Dr. Herbert Oyer, who
lengthened the path into infinity,

To Dr. Marion McPherson, who,
on one occasion, branched the path,

And to my husband, who

has let me share yet another path,
and surely . . . the most important.

K. G. B.

 

 

Ur

 

Ova-I1 ..
U“ § .

Y":‘r 5'-
H-U A V.

"" ' .‘-~
H

Tye-nun.— -

any _. ._

HI
'1

f;’ i-t '7)
tel-T.

if!

F'“

'7 I I (4,
(D i
I) (1'

(‘1 (’J (
t) (I
(1' ”9

f1
"

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LISTOFTABLES................. v
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Purpose of the Study
Importance of the Study
Definitions

Organization of the Report

II. REVIEW OF BACKGROUND LITERATURE. . . . . . 27

DevelOpment of Articulatory Skills

Psychogenic Aspects of Articulatory
Skills

Intelligence Testing Variability as
Related to Articulation and Language
Skills

Dyslalia and Dyslexia as Related
Language Functions

The Influence of Parent-Child
Interaction upon Functional
Articulatory Disorders

Summary

III. SUBJECTS, TEST INSTRUMENT AND PROCEDURES. 91

Subjects

Test Instrument

Standardization Sample Procedures
Scaled Scores

Experimental Group Procedures

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . .105

Results
Discussion

111

 

 

 

V
11.:

-""1-‘v

““3"

.

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . .

Summary
Conclusions
Implications for Further Research

BIBLIOGRAPHY.
APPENDIX A.

APPENDIX.B.

APPENDIX C.

APPENDIX D.

APPENDIX E.

SUMMARY TABLE OF WISC SCORES FOR
THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP . . . . . .

SUMMARY TABLES OF MEAN VERBAL AND
PERFORMANCE SUBSCALE SCORES AND
S.D.'S FOR ALL SUBJECTS BY AGE
GRWPS . O O C C O O O O O O O O 0

SUMMARY TABLE OF INDIVIDUAL VERBAL
AND PERFORMANCE I.Q. SCALE
SCORES-—DIRECTIONALITY OF MEANS. .

RANKING OF THE WISC SUBTEST SCORES
BY DEVIATION FROM AVERAGE TEST
AGE SCORES FOR THE SIX AGE GROUPS,
EXPERIMENTAL SAMPLE. . . . . . . .

TEST AGE EQUIVALENTS ON SUBTESTS OF

THE WISC BY MONTHS FOR DEFECTIVE
SPEAmS O O O O O O O O O C O O 0

iv

151

160

173

175

180

182

185

i‘

 

TABLE
I.

II.

III.

IV.

VI.

VII.

VIII.

IX.

LIST OF TABLES
Page

Mean Full Scale Intelligence Quotients
for Speech Defective and Normal Children. . . 109

Mean Verbal Scale Intelligence Quotients
for Speech Defective and Normal Children. . . 110

Mean Performance Scale Intelligence
Quotients for Speech Defective and
Normal Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Mean Verbal Subtest Scores on the W130
for Speech Defective and Normative Samples. . 113

Mean Performance Subtest Scores on the W180
for Speech Defective and Normative Samples. . 114

Vocabulary Subtest Scores and Mean Verbal
Test Scores of the Experimental Group . . . . 115

Analysis of Directionality of Verbal and
Performance Scale I.Q.'s for the
Experimental Group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

Ranking of WISC Subtest Scores by Deviation
from Average Total Scores for the Experi-
mental Group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‘. . 124

Intra-Test Scale Score Ranking for Combined
Age Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Ranked Means of Groups of Gifted, Average,
Mentally Retarded and Speech Defective
Children on the High and Low Subtests of
the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children. . .n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure I

1. Mean verbal and Performance Subtest
Scale Scores for Normal and Defective
Speakers, Ages 6-0 to 7‘0 0 o o o o o

2. Mean verbal and Performance Subtest
Scale Scores for Normal and Defective
Speakers, Ages 7-0 to 8-0 . . . . . .

3. Mean Verbal and Performance Subtest
Scale Scores for Normal and Defective
Speakers, Ages 8-0 to 9-0 . . . . . .

A. Mean verbal and Performance Subtest
Scale Scores for Normal and Defective

Speakers, Ages 9-0 to 10-0. . . . . .

5. Mean verbal and Performance Subtest
Scale Scores for Normal and Defective
Speakers, Ages 10-0 to 11-0 . . . . .

6. Mean verbal and Performance Subtest

Scale Scores for Normal and Defective
Speakers, Ages 11-0 to 12-0 . . . . .

vi

Page

116

117

118

119

120

121

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Speech and language are learned processes, but the
manner and degree to which they are learned is of primary
importance to those interested in verbal communication.
Difficulty in verbal communication based upon faulty
learning of articulatory skills has long been considered
an area of concern in the field of speech pathology and
audiology.

Speech disorders may be classified in gross
fashion as either functional or organic, with the presum-
ably functional, or psychogenic, disorders far outweighing
those of organic origin in frequency of occurrence. How-
ever, comparatively little is known regarding psychogenic
factors in functional articulatory defects, although the
study of the acoustical manifestations of articulation
deviancy has been underway for three decades. In addition,
little research has been attempted in the specific realm of
articulatory deficiencies and verbal skills as measured by
a standardized instrument which assesses several aspects of
verbal performance.

Developmentally, the importance of articulatory

adeptness is reflected in the other speech and language

1

measures. As Schreiber points out throughout her text,
successful skills in one area increase the probability
of success in other areas.1 The magnitude of failure of
many children to achieve success is indicated by Hall's
comprehensive review of functional disorders of articula-
tion. She indicates that

articulation problems have long been recognized

as the most prevalent of all the disorders of

speech. Because this is true and since only a

small fraction of articulation cases are organic-

ally based, functional articulation problems

constitute a highly significant group of dis-

orders in the total field of speech pathology.

They merit serious study and much greater

scientific investigation than they have yet

received, not only because they are so common

but also because they are by no means so simply

explaineg and treated as many people have
assumed.

In addition, she indicates that "probably more than any

other type of speech disorder, ... . functional articula-
tion cases are intimately associated with all dimensions

of . . . the individual's growth."3 These dimensions in-
clude physical, intellectual, emotional and social growth
patterns and their intra—relationships as well as the modifi-
cation of these patterns as a function of the environment.

Thus, it can be seen that functional articulatory defects

 

1Flora R. Schrieber, Your Child's Speech (New York:
G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1956), pp. ii-391.

2Margaret Hall Powers, "Functional Disorders of
Articulation——Symptomatology and Etiology," Handbook of
Speech Pathology, ed. Lee Edward Travis (New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957), p; 707.

3Ibid., p. 709.

represent only the diagnostic label for a comprehensive
disorder.

The American Speech and Hearing Association has
indicated its concern regarding the etiological signifi-
cance of articulatory disorders by appointing a committee
to study the research needs specifically related to this
problem. The committee concluded that

research in the area of articulatory problems
not only must be related to other dimensions

of language which may be affected, but also
must building upon normative data involving the
development of articulation from birth through
adulthood. These data and the conditions from
which they arise must provide the starting
point for investigation of deviant behavior.
Unfortunately, information on this subject is
not highly reliable. The conventional phonemic
concept used by most research workers and
clinicians in defining the articulatory disorder
were questioned by the committee. Creation of

a more satisfactory concept is dependent in part
upon the availability of more infiormation about
the development of articulation.

The committee also indicated that there was a need for
research in relation to linguistic factors such as vocabu-
lary, sentence structure, sentence length, and articulation
development in relation to social, psychological, physical
and intellectual factors, among many others.5

The interweaving of articulatory ability in the

 

”Jesse Villarreal et al., ”I. Report of Sub-
Committee on Articulation Problems,” Journal of Speech and
Hearing_Disorders Monograph: Research Needs in Speech
Pathglggy_and Audiology, Supplement VISeptember, 1959),
Del.

5Ibid., p. 15.

 

 

‘o"

 

 

fabric of speech, language and personality is not a recent
concept. For example, Terman and Merrill pointed out in

1937 that

language, essentially, is the shorthand of the
higher thought processes, and the level at which
this shorthand functions is one of the most import-
ant determigants of the level of the processes
themselves.

Therefore, it can be seen that the cognitive aspects of
language have long been evaluated as essentially determining
the extent of the growth of the cognitive processes.
Language and cognition appear to develop together.

While Terman and Merrill attempted to measure this
growth through a considerable number of verbally-oriented
sub-tests on the Stanford-Binet, David Wechsler later moved
to a more global concept of verbal performance and its
intellectual connotations. He reported that

clinical experience and research in the past

two decades have shown that it is not possible
to identify or equate general intelligence with
intellectual ability, however defined. Actually
any and every test of intelligence measures
something more, often a good deal more, than
sheer intellectual ability-—or any aspect of it,
verbal, abstract, numerical or even 'g'.

Thus, in designing a test of intelligence, Wechsler concluded

A AA

6Lewis M. Terman and Maud A. Merrill, Measurin
Intelligence (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1937;,

p. 5.

7David Wechsler, WISC Manual: Wechsler Intelli-
gence Scale for Children (New York: The Psychological

Corporation, 19E§7, pp. 4-5.

 

 

,._ ‘1 -1’_-_-_ __ - -._..__.... ..

 

that

while intellectual capacity (or any facet of it)

may be a unitary trait or ability, general intell-

igence is not. In brief, intelligence is a pgrt

of a larger whole, namely personality itself.
Wechsler noted that the 12 tests which comprise the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children are divided
into two subgroups identified as verbal and Performance,
and indicated that most of the verbal tests correlate
better with each other than with tests of the performance
group. Concomitantly, the performance tests correlate
more adequately with each other than with the verbal sub-
tests. However, he takes care to emphasize that both sub-
groups of tests tap other factors,

among them non-intellective ones, which cut across

the groups to produce other classifications or

catagories that are equally important to consider

in evaluating the individual's performance.9

It may be concluded, therefore, that language,

cognition, intellectual capacity, general intelligence,
and personality cannot be truly dichotomized along any
series of continuums, but rather, reflect a reciprocal
interweaving of processes and developmental patterns. In

addition, recent research in oral language performance

indicates a close relationship between psycholinguistic

 

81b1dc’ p0 5.
9Ibid., p. 6.

 

 

t
.
u
- .
.
.
o n
a.
.
o
. .
.
.
e
.
O C
.
, \
O _ .1
.
.
e o O
.
.
.
o,
.
O o
.
.
h
I
.
o,
u
.
v I I
e y t
.
,
.
.
o
.
'<
.
.
x
.
O
.
.
r‘
O
.
I 1
I
P I

 

functions, as detailed above, and articulatory competence.
While defective articulation and disturbance of psycho-
linguistic function may be differentiated, DeHirsch, Jansky
and Langford report that

the two are closely related. Difficulties with

formulation of conceptual material belonging to

the psycholinguistic aspect of language often

leads directly to a breakdown in articulation

because the organizational load becomes too heavy.10
They report that articulatory competence depends upon the
accurate perception and recall of "auditory-verbal
gestalten; on adequate central integration of fine movement
patterning of the peripheral speech mechanism; and according

to Hardy, . . . on feedback."11 The complexity of functional,

or psychogenic, articulatory disorders is thus confirmed.

Purpose of the Study;

 

The present study deals with the performance of
speech defective children who exhibit a functional articu-
lation disorder as measured by a standardized intelligence
test. While there are literally hundreds of published
intelligence tests, of the standardized tests available,
the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children constitutes

the most reliable and valid instrument which provides for

 

t w — WH~H ”'u

10Katrina DeHirsch, Jeannette Jefferson Jansky and
William S. Langford, "The Oral Language Performance of
Premature Children and Controls " Journal of Speech and
Hearing Disorders, XXIX, No. 1 (February, 1964), p. 64.

11Ibid., p. 63.

both verbal and non-verbal measurement, as well as permit-
ting analysis of several verbal scales related to speech
and language functions.

The purpose of the study is to evaluate the
functioning of children exhibiting severe articulatory
defects and the "normal child" as portrayed by the mean
performance of the standardization groups utilized in the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children sample.

The following null hypotheses were formulated for
this study:

1. There are no significant differences in
functioning between speech defective children, as defined
in this study, and normal children on the Full Scale
Intelligence Quotients of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale
for Children.

2. There are no significant differences in
functioning between speech defective children and normal
children on the Verbal Scale of the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for Children.

3. There are no significant differences between
speech defective children and normal children on the Pere
formance Scale of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children.

4. There are no significant differences between

speech defective children and normal children on the sub-test

scaled scores, and, in particular, the vecabulary subtest

of the Verbal Scale.

Importance of the Study,

As was recently indicated by the U. S. Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, impairments of articula-
tion are among the treatment problems of over 15% of the
entire population of the United States, ages birth to 21.12
In addition, surveys over the past thirty years have indicat-
ed that children and adults suffering from some type of
speech disorder outnumber all other handicapped groups.13’ 14

Evidence of the current interest in the speech
handicapped is reflected by the level of current federal
support in this area. Research support for the year 1965
was supplied by a number of agencies, including the Vocation-
al Rehabilitation Administration, Division of Handicapped
Children and Youth, and the Division of Educational Research
of the U. S. Office of Education, Children's Bureau of the

 

12v. s. Department of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, Public Health Service, Research Profile, Summer of
Pro am in Hearing, Language,_and Speech Disorders, Prof le
E, PHS Pub. No. 1156, Rev., 1965, p. 2}

13A. W. Mills and H. Streit, "Report of a Speech
Survey, Holyoke Mass.", Journal of Speech Disorders, VII,
No. 2 (June, l9fi2), pp. 161- 7.

lJ‘LCharles van Riper, Speech Correction: Principles
and Methods (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1954), pp.'33-36.

 

Welfare Administration, Division of Chronic Diseases of the
Public Health Service, National Institute of Neurological
Diseases and Blindness, and the National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development. These agencies contributed a
grand total of approximately $18,575,639.00 for speech and
hearing in the year 1965, $8,798,743.00 of it for research.
One agency, the Office of Education, reports that among the
objectives of its Children's Bureau are two of importance to
this study: (1) To assist in the early detection of children
with conditions resulting in communicative handicaps and
(2) the provision of multi-disciplinary and comprehensive
diagnostic evaluations of speech, hearing and language dis-
orders.15

So important is the need for specific identification
of children suffering from a variety of speech disorders
(the most common of which are articulatory defects) that the
U. S. Office of Enucation, Division of Handicapped Children
and Youth, is funding a multi-million dollar project which
is to be designed as a prevalence study of speech and hearing
disorders among school children in the United States. The
primary objective is to obtain a reliable estimate of the

prevalence of speech and hearing disorders in school children

 

15American Speech and Hearing Association, "Federal
Support of the Profession of Speech and Hearing," ASHA, VIII,
No. 5 (may. 1966). 9. 197-99. '

 

 

10

by means of a sampling technique and screening procedures.
Data will be gathered from approximately 200,000 children

16 The current focus via

from the 48 continental states.
funding on speech and hearing problems and thus upon articu—
latory disorders which make up the numerical majority of
these problems reinforces the need for knowledge regarding
the child who possesses this most common syndrome, the
functional articulatory defect.

As the American Speech and Hearing Association Com-
mittee on Articulation Disorders indicated in 1965, there
is a need to develop a more satisfactory definition of
"articulation disorder" as well as a need to define both
the factors which promote and the factors which impede the
normal development of speech sound articulation.17 In
addition, while research devoted to the etiology of function-
al articulation problems has been fairly extensive, this
research has failed to indicate specific factors as having
causal significance. Winitz and Lawrence, in a review of
the major studies in this area, report that present research
knowledge of functional articulation cases has failed to

demonstrate systematic deficiencies for any of the factors

 

16American Speech and Hearing Association, "In-
stitutional News and Announcements," ASHA, VII, No. 11
(November, 1965), p. 480.

17v111arrea1, op. cit., pp. 14-17.

11

studied. They state that since organic factors have never
been clearly shown to operate in the "usual" functional
articulation case, it may be assumed that certain unidenti-
fiable learning factors have operated in the past to account

for the differences in articulatory functioning of young

18

children. Their study led them to conclude that there was

no difference between children with good and poor articula-
tion in rate or level of learning.

In summary, it would seem that differences in
articulation ability may be due to some rather
complex reinforcement contingencies that have
operated in the past or still Operate, for when
learning conditions are made similar, as in this
study, differences between children with good and
poor articulation are not apparent in rate or level
of learning. Since little is known about the
factors that account for language learning although
much information is available on the stages of
language growth, it is not as yet cledg what the
reinforcement contingencies might be.

The "yet-unindentifiable learning factors" influencing articu-
latory skills, to which Winitz and Lawrence allude, may be
among those which Andreas has referred as "language habits."
He indicates that language represents learning of long

standing in the temporal sense, and he reports that divergence

18Harris Winitz and Martha Lawrence, "Children's

Articulation and Sound Learning Ability," Journal of Speech
and Hearing Research, Iv, No. 3 (September, 19617} pp. 259-68.

19Ib1d., p. 266.

12

of past language experience will be reflected in verbal
responses.20

In past attempts to understand articulatory
problems, little emphasis has been placed upon the
psychological factors as well as the learning factors. For
example, in her welleknown discussion of functional disorders
of articulation, Margaret Hall Powers is able to provide
reference information on only 5 studies related either
directly or indirectly to the functional aspect of such
defects, although lޤ_references are included in the chapter
regarding the symptomatology and etiology of articulatory
disorders.21 In another review of research on articulatory
(isorders and personality, Spriestersbach indicates that
studies geared to assess the impact of functional articulation
disorders have been largely ignored and points out that lack
of interest cannot be due to lack of material since artic-
ulatory disorders constitute the bulk of the speech
pathologist‘s clinical load.22 He stresses the psychogenic

nature of a non—organic articulatory disorder by stating

that there is a "personal backwash" in speech or communication.

 

2OJBurton G. Andreas, Experimental Psychology, (New

York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1960), p. 5.

21Powers, op. cit., pp. 707-68.

2'2Duane C. Spriestersbach, "Research in Articula-

tion Disorders and Personality," Journal of Speech and Hearing
Disorders, XXI, No. 3 (September, 1956), pp. 329-35.

13

He adds that

this logic, pursued to its ultimate conclusions,
would appear to say that a speech disorder which
does not have a psychological impact on the
speaker is not a disorder of any consequence since
communication is apparently proceeding without
difficulty. . . . An articulation disorder may
cause such psychological repercussions within the
speaker thaB maladjustments will be the probable
conclusions 3

Spriestersbach's review included every appropriate study
that had been abstracted or published in Speech Monographs,
the Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders and Psychological
Abstracts during the period 1950 to 1956. He found 9 studies
in all and, after evaluating each in terms of research design
and statistical analysis, reported that

with a five to four count in favor of maladjust-

ment it would appear that no conclusive data

exist on which to base any kind of a general-

ization, one way or the other. However, one is

struck by the wide range of severity of the

articulatory defects frequently found in the

groups studied. It is to be questioned whether

many of the mild articulatory defects that are

worked with clinically reagly represent serious

barriers to communication.
The writer's review of research in this area would indicate
that the above criticism of past research design has not as
yet been remedied. There is little or no similarity between
the various samples of "mild", "moderate" or "severe" artic-

ulatory defects as described in current research, even on

 

23Ibid., p. 330.

zunid 0’ p 0 333-31} 0

14

such a gross measure as the number of misarticulated
phonemes. As Spriestersbach pointed out in his summary

. . . it would be surprising to find that
measurable maladjustments are related to this
rather vaguely defined group of problems. The
study is yet to be done which attempts to
measure the adjustment problems of a group of
speakers with severe articulatory problems. The
multiplicity of causes in so great, the effects
of the disorder are so varied, and the inherent
error within the testing instruments used is so
great that it would be surprising, indeed, to
find conclusive data on this question from the
study of the usual 'representative' samgge of
individuals with articulatory problems.

He further feels that test measures of personality are, at
best amorphous. Such measures are likely to be invalid. He
states

one is forced to conclude that the contribution

of research to an understanding of the relation-

ship between articulatory defects and personality

is largely negative. The data do Bgt justify a

statement about the relationships.
Spriestersbach concludes that "utilization of appropriate
instruments and the construction of relevant hypotheses are
long overdue."27

A possible method of approach to this problem of

the effect of functional, or psychogenic, speech problems upon
the verbal communicative behavior of children may be through
the use of the more adequately standardized and validated

diagnostic instrument, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for

 

25
26-

'55

1d.

'5'

i

27

E

15

Children. The speech defective child's performance on the
Verbal Scale is of particular interest since it is a matter
of clinical observation that school adjustment is related
to verbal skills. The Vocabulary subtest holds special
interest as well since performance in Vocabulary appears to
be sensitive to early parent-child relationships. Finally,
achievement, as reflected by both oral and visual skills, is
measured throughout both the verbal and Performance Scales
of the Wechsler. Everhart states still more explicitly that
speech and reading are inextricably associated in the process
of language and adds that "any limitation or facility in one
is directly reflected to some degree in the other. Articula-
tory defects are considered to affect reading skills."28
For at least the past two decades, those interested
in written language disorders and in reading difficulties
have been utilizing the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children in an attempt to establish a "poor reader profile."
Sampling difficulties have also been encountered in this
area, and most of the data reported have been collected on
a small number of subjects. Just as there tends to be

little or no differentiation made between milld, moderate or

severe articulation disorders, there also tends to be little

 

28Rodney W. Everhart, "Literature Survey of Growth
and Development Factors in Articulatory Maturation," Journal
of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XXV, No. 1 (February, 1965),
p. 62.

 

 

 

16

differentiation made between a mild, moderate or severe
reading disorder. Thus, it is not surprising to find that
Everhart reports that
an investigation of research reports indicates
an absence of complete agreement as to the re-
lationship of reading defects to articulation
aberrations. . . . Any limitation in real or
vicarious experiences, with their concomitant
limitations in word meaning and articulatory
fluency could pegadventure have a bearing upon
reading ability.

Whatever the sampling difficulties encountered, it
has been reported by psychologists involved in clinical
work that research on 14 well-known and standardized tests,
including the Binet and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children "supported" at least one hypothesis which is per-
tinent to the present study, and that is that "each subtest
item of standardized intelligence tests can tap wide per-
sonality dimensions."30

Since the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
subtests scaled scores may reveal typical performance on the
part of articulatory defective children, it is of importance
to note that while

the numerical measures of scatter in themselves
are not regarded as very helpful in clinical

 

29Ibid., p. 60.

30Erika Fromm, Lenore Hartmann and Marian Marschak,
"Children's Intelligence Tests as a Measure of Dynamic Per-
sonality Functioning,“ American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,
XXVII, No. 1 (January, 1957}, pp. 134iufi;

. ...
u. m . .a—
a: a:
... r” 5
.5. ad I.

F:
F?
C»

nu
9U

l.

. \ Av
7. S
“A
a . a»
S
u e
a. E
a. .n.»
W .G
.6... S

a.
so

-vu tge

ht! 0“,.

 

I‘ll—I ”Ike ‘

in!

 

 

17

diagnosis, the extent and scatter and the qualitative
analysis of the test performance are extremely valuable
in determining the extent of maladjustment. Scatter is
thought of dynamically as the interrelationship of
functions underlying the individual's achievement on
the various subtests and represents the intra-individ-
ual configuration or pattern."31

It is hoped that this study may make a contribution
in the specific area of analysis of the relationships be-
tween functional articulation disorders in children and the
subtest scatter on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for

Children.

Definitions

 

Several terms appear in the literature dealing
with the various aspects of this study. These terms and
their definitions follow.

Articulation. As defined by Powers, it is the

 

production of speech sounds by the stopping or constricting
of the vocalized or non-vocalized breath stream by move-
ment of the lips, tongue, velum or pharynx.32

Disorders of Articulation. These refer to the

 

faulty placement, timing, direction, pressure, speed, or
integration of these movements, resulting in absent or

incorrect speech sounds, as defined by Powers.33

 

31Erika Fromm and Lenore Hartmann, Intelligence, a
Dynamic Approach, (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and
Company, Inc., 1955), pp. 45-46.

32

 

 

Powers, 0p. cit., p. 707
33Ibid.

 

 

 

18

Functional Disorders of Articulation. Powers states
. . . A functional articulation disorder can be defined
as an inability to produce correctly all of the stand-
ard speech sounds of the language, an inability for
which there is no appreciable structural, physiological,
or neurological basis in the speech mechanism or its
supporting structures, but which can be accounted for
by normal variations in thfi organism or by environmental
or psychological factors.3
For the purposes of this study, a functional or psychogenic
articulation disorder is operationally defined as misartic-
ulations or omissions of standard English phonemes by an
individual who reveals no structural, physiological or known
neurological basis for these deviations.

Classification of Functional Articulation Defects.
Considerable confusion exists in the literature regarding
classification of articulatory defects. With children under
eight, maturational effects of phonemic growth must be taken
into account.35 Children below this age may misarticulate
some phonemes and still possess "normal speech." Templin
and Darley state that accurate articulation is "assumed

completed for most children by the age of eight."36

 

3uIbid., p. 708.

35Mildred Templin, "Norms on 3 Screening Test of
Articulation for Ages Three through Eight," Journal of Speech
and Hearing Disorders, XVIII, No. 4 (December, l953),pp.32}31.

36Mildred Templin, The Templin-Darley:l§sts of Artic-
ulation, (Iowa City, Iowa: Bureau of Educational Research and
Service Extension Division, State University of Iowa, 1960),

p. 8.

19

Templin's research untilized as a criterion of phon~
emic age the passage of test items by 90% or more of her
sample. Age scaling procedures are common, as exemplified
by the Laradon Scale37 but do not measure levels of severity.
In addition, recent research indicates that the age scales
themselves may be inaccurate. A recent study of 15,255
children revealed that by the end of the first grade, no
phoneme was misarticulated by 10% of the children. The
authors concluded that all phonemes are fully developed by
at least the age of seven.38

Severity judgments are difficult for yet another'
reason. As Morrison points out, "Indices based solely on
the frequency of error may be inadequate for some clinical
and experimental purposes.39 Misarticulations must be eval-
uated in terms of the degree of misarticulation, the consist-
ency of misarticulation, and the intelligibility level of
communicative speech as well as the "raw" number of errors.

There appears to be no satisfactory classification

system. Even crude counting becomes complex since each

 

W37William Edmonston, Laradon Articulation Scale Man-
ual, (Beverly Hills, California: Western Psychological Serv-
ices, 1963), p. 2.

38Kathleen Pendergast, et. a1., "An Articulation
Study of 15,255 Seattle First Grade Children with and without
Kindergarten," Exceptional Children, XXXII, No. 8 (April,

1966), pp. 541-50.

39Sheila Morrison, "Measuring the Severity of Artic-
ulation Defectiveness," Journal of Speech and Hearing Dis-
orders, XX, No. 4 (December, 1955): p. 348.

 

 

 

20

position in which it may occur in a word, making a total max-
imum count of 96, as in one study,40 or by defining misartic-
ulated phonemes as ones which are deviant in one or more
positions, as in another study.41 A severe articulatory
disorder has been variously portrayed as a numerical entity
of 3,)+2 or has been noted as 3 to 4,43 as a minimum of 4,M

a maximum of 5,45 or even as 6 errors.46 A few studies

 

uOCarl R. Weaver, Catherine Furbee, and Rodney W.
Everhart, "Paternal Occupational Class and Articulation
Defects in Children " Journal of Spggch and Hearing Dis-
orders, xxv, No. 2 (May, 1960), pp. 171-75.

41Rodney Everhart, "The Relationship between Artic—
ulation and Other Developmental Factors in Children," Journal
of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XVIII, No. 4 (December,
1953): 9903322350

qudna Jenkins and Frances E. Lohr, "Severe Artic-
ulation Disorders and Motor Ability," Journal of Speech and
Hearing Disorders, XXIX, No. 3 (August, 1964): pp. 286e92.

43Louis Lerea and Bruce Ward, "Speech Avoidance
Among Children with Oral-Communication Defects," Journal of
Psychology, LX, 2nd half (July, 1965), p. 266.

qurnest L. Kronvall and Charles Diehl, "The Re-
lationship of Auditory Discrimination to Articulation De-
fects of Children with No Known Organic Impairment," Journal
of S eech and Hearinngisorders, XIX, No. 3 (September,

195 9 pp. 335-380

uSErnest L. Kronvall, "An Investigation of Some of
the Factors Frequently Suggested as Causes of Functional
Articulation Disorders," Dissertation Abstracts, Vol. XXVI,
No. 8, p. 4810.

46Ronald K. Sommers et. al., "Effects of Speech
Therapy and Speech Improvement upon Articulation and Read-
ing," Journal of Speech and Hearinngisorders, XXVI, No. 1
(February, 1961), pp. 27-38}

 

 

 

21

47’ 48 While the above-cited

provide no phonemic criteria.
studies vary considerably in the age range of subjects, most
utilize six-year—olds whose "normal" speech may well incorpor-
ate 2, 3 or more errors.

For the purpose of this study, subjects have been
chosen who exhibit a minimum of 5 misarticulated phonemes,
which occur consistenply in at least two of the 3 positions
(initial, medial, and final) in single word utterances, and
whose intelligibility is reduced in running speech. Since
the mean age of the children in this study is 8-0, this would
indicate on an a priori basis, that a severe articulatory
defect exists. This is a more stringent application of
defectiveness than has been heretofore applied.

Application of the term functional or ppyphogenic
for this study incorporates the Power's definition quoted
early in this section. Each subject was evaluated for
structural, physiological, or neurological disorders based
upon case history, school records, medical reports, and an
oral peripheral examination, as well as gross and fine motor
evaluation. Children with known organic, neurological or

brain-injured syndromes were rejected from the sample.

 

47Dorothy K. Marge, "The Social Status of Speech-
Handicapped Children," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,
IX, No. 2 (June, 1966), pp. 165-781

48Genivieve Arnold, "The Illinois Test of Psycho-
Linguistic Ability and Severe Articulatory Problems," ASHA
Convention Abstracts, v, No. 10 (October, 1966), p. 789.

22

pyslalia. This term refers to defective articula-
tion due to faulty learning or to abnormality of the extern-
al speech organs and is not due to lesions of the central
nervous system.49 In this study, dyslalia is referred to
solely as defective articulation resulting from faulty learn-
ing.

stlexia. This term has been variously defined as
partial inability to read characterized by associative
learning difficulty and as a form of dysphasia by Wood,50
or as a symptom of congenital language disability by Arnold,51
or as a specific reading disability known as specific dyslexia,
implying an idiopathic condition, by Kessler.52 For the
purpose of this study, dyslexia is defined as a partial in-
ability to read, a disorder of unknown etiology, and specific
dyslexia is a symptom of general language disability.

Test Variabiligy. .According to Wechsler, test

variability defines two types of erraticism in performance, i.e.

 

49Kenneth S. Wood, "Terminology and Nomenclature,"
Handbook of Speech Pathology, ed. Lee Edward Travis (New
York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957), p. 54.

5oIbid.

51Godfrey E. Arnold, "I. Present Concepts of
Etiologic Factors," Studies in Tachyphemia (New York: Speech
Rehabilitation Institute), p. 11.

52Jane W. Kessler, Psychopathology_of Childhood
(Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.), p. 147.

23

inter-test and intra-test variability.53 Inter-test varia-
bility is often referred to as "scatter“ or the uneven-
ness in "the level of achievement on different subtest
groups or tests. One can observe scatter in the distribution
of passed and failed tests."54 Scatter is also defined as
the intra-individual configuration or pattern, or the "inter-
relationship of functions underlying the individual's
achievements on various subtests."55
For the purpose of this study, inter-test varia-
bility, scatter, and patterning will all refer to the
variation in performance by the subject on the sub-tests of
the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children.
Anxiety. Among selected definitions of anxiety
appear the following: (1) it is a feeling, or affect, of a
particularly unpleasant nature which may limit the individual's
freedom of action;56 (2) it is a disruptive state which re-
flects itself in fluctuations in attention and inability to
concentrate.57 Wechsler states that some of the W180 sub-

 

53David Wechsler, The Measurement and Appraisal of
Adult I telli ence (Baltimore, Maryland: The Williams and
Wilkins Co., 1958), p. 162. .

4
5 Erica Fromm and Lenore Hartmann, Intelligence, A
D amic A roach (Garden City, New York: DouEleday and
00., Inc., 1955 , p. 45.

55Ibid.
56

 

 

Kessler, op. cit., p. 44.
57Wechsler, op. cit., pp. 175-75.

 

 

 

24

tests are more sensitive to anxiety, such as Arithmetic,
Digit Span, Digit Symbol, and Coding.58

For the purpose of this study, anxiety is defined
as a disruptive state which may be reflected by the de-
pression of certain sub-test scores.

Intellectual Dysfunction. Intellectual dysfunction
may be of two types. General intellectual dysfunction is
referred to as intellectual inhibition effecting observable
behavior, while learning disabilities are simply intellect-
ual dysfunctioning limited to scholastic endeavors.59 The
latter definition is reflected in Wechsler's statement that
intellectual functioning may be thought of as the "ability
to learn."60 Thus, intellectual dysfunction is the inability
to learn.

For the purpose of this study, intellectual dys-
function is defined in a very restrictive fashion, 1. e.,

the depression of the sub-test scores indicating disability

in learning.

Organization of the Report
Chapter I has introduced the concept of functional
disorders of articulation and its importance to general speech

and language function, as well as its relationship to verbal

 

58Wechsler, op. cit.
59Fromm and Hartmann, op. cit., p. 25.
6OWechsler, op. cit., pp. 4-5.

25

performance as measured by standardized tests of intelligence.
The problem of this paper was presented, y;§,, the evaluation
of the verbal and non-verbal functioning level of children
exhibiting severe articulatory defects as compared with nor-
mal children on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children.
Several terms encountered in the current study were defined
and discussed.

Chapter II presents a comprehensive overview of the
literature related to past research in the areas of artic-
ulation, psychogenic disorders, intelligence testing, ling-
uistic functioning, intellectual patterning, and parent-child
relationships. These areas will be considered in the follow-
ing order: (1) development of articulatory skills, (2) Psycho-
genic aspects of articulatory skills, (3) intelligence testing
variability as related to articulation and language skills,
(4) dyslalia and dyslexia as related linguistic functions,
and (5) the influence of parent-child interaction upon
functional articulatory disorders.

Chapter III presents the procedures related to this
study, including selection of subjects and test administra-
tion.

Chapter Iv details the results of the statistical
analyses. The results of this study are discussed with
regard to the hypotheses set forth in Chapter I. The find-

ings of this study are related to previous research.

26

Chapter V presents a summary of the present study.
Conclusions are drawn on the basis of the analysis, and

recommendations for further research are made.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE BACKGROUND LITERATURE

There has been considerable research over the past
years which indicates that the development of articulatory
skills is dependent upon much more than a normal physiolog-
ical substructure. Everhart reviewed the growth and devel-8
opmental factors in articulatory maturation as identified in
the literature during the past 15 years reported that

whether or not the child develops acceptable patterns
of articulation depends upon numerous complex and’
multi-dimensional elements. In the final analysis,
it is not practicable to relegate articulatory
maturation to any one single variable of growth

and development. Actually, competency in articula-
tion seems to focus upon the extent to which all
developmental propensities contribute to the
eventuation of speech out of the psycho-physical
systems inherent in the human organism. The
maturation of articulation in many children does
not proceed in an orderly cycle, but is subjected
to various disturbances imposed by individual
deviations in sequence, Kate and pattern of

growth and development.6

In a somewhat more simplified statement, Myklebust
indicated that three "integrities" are necessary for the
acquisition of language: (1) the integrity of the peripheral

nervous system, (2) the integrity of the central nervous

 

61Everhart, "Literature Survey of Growht and Develop-
ment Factors in Articulation Maturation," op. cit., p. 59.

27

28

system, and (3) the integrity of the emotions.62 Milisen
further defines such a triumvirate in his statement that

conditions which precipitate and maintain artic-
ulation defects after the child has begun to

speak are only an extension of the conditions

which limited the production and differentiation

of sounds and which interferred with the develop-
ment of a communication attitude before he began

to speak. . . . This concept that misarticulation
is a substitute response precipitated by a break-
down in the normal learning process should simplify
articulation therapy because one does not need to
create distinct types of therapy for all of the
'organic' and 'non-organic' groups. He will instead
deal with each case on its own merits which will be
determined primarily by behavior and speech per-
formance, not by appearance and inheritance.

While others might not agree with the therapeutic
approach suggested above, there would be considerable agree-
ment among research workers in the area of articulatory dis-
orders that articulation defects are related to environmental

conditions and communication attitudes.64’ 65’ 66

 

62Helmer Myklebust, "Language Disorders in Children,"
Exceptional Children, XXII, No. 4 (January, 1956), pp. 163-64.

63Robert Milisen, et. al., "The Disorder of Artic-
ulation: A Systematic Clinical and Experimental Approach, "
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, Monograph Supple-
ment No. 4 (December, 1954), p. 8.

64Ernest Henrickson, "Psychological Aspects of the
Development of Speech and Language, "Archives of Physical
Medicine Rehabilitation, XXXXI, No. 3 (March, 1960),

pp. 95- ~102'

65Everhart, "The Relationship between Articulation
and Other Developmental Factors in Children,"o op.cit.,
Do 332-

66

 

Powers, op. cit., p. 711.

 

29

Many speech pathologists feel that it is the
communication attitude of the speech defective himself
which contributes heavily to the etiology of articulatory
defects.67’ 68’ 69 Others have found little or no
correlation between disturbed communication attitudes
and articulatory skills.70’ 71 Some point an accusing
finger at the mother-child relationships as the crux of
both the articulatory disorder and the child's personality
difficulties. McCarthy summarizes much of this research
by saying

When the child whose speech is not developing
normally is examined, it is usually found that

there have been anomalies of language develop-
ment present in one form or another throughout

 

67Lerea and Ward, op. cit., pp. 265-70.

68Arthur L. Solomon, "Emotional and Behavior
Problems of First Grade School Children with Functional
Defects of Articulation," ASHA, II, No. 10 (October,
1960). p. 378.

69Arthur L. Solomon, "Personality and Behavior
Patterns of Children with Functional Defects of Artic-
ulation," Child Development, XXXII, No. 4 (December, 1961),

pp 0 731-370

700. w. Nelson, "An Investigation of Certain
Factors Relating to the Nature of Children with Functional
Defects of Articulation," Journal of Educational Research,
XXXXVII, No. 3 (November, 1953), pp. 211-16.

71Leonard Goodstein, "Functional Speech Disorders
and Personality: A Survey of the Research," Journal of
Speech and Hearing Disorders, XXIII, No. 4 (December, 1958),

pp. 359-75.

 

30

his life. These language disorders tend to

appear in children who manifest certain types

of personalities.72

There have been a number of conflicting studies

in this general area. For example, Andersland reports
that a relationship exists between children's articulation
skills and maternal scores on certain personality tests
which purport to measure hostility and rejection.73
Lerea, however, reported that no relationship existed
between the rated severity of children's articulation
disorders and the personality of the mother.74 Mowrer's
current theory of speech acquisition, however, tends to
stress the role of vocalization by the mother and the
necessity for verbal and physical interaction between
the mother and Child.75 McCarthy's research indicates
that children who enjoy only a minimum of individualized

adult contact in early Childhood have poorer speech and

language. She indicates that since the mother is normally

 

72Dorothea McCarthy, "Language Disorders and
Parent-Child Relationships," Journal of Speech and Hearing
Disorders, XXX, No. 4 (December, 1954), pp. 514-23

 

73Phyllis Andersland, "Maternal and Environmental
Factors Related to Success in Speech Improvement Training,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Researpp, IV, No. 4 (December,

1961). pp- 79-90.

71+Louis Lerea, "Assessing Language Development,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, I, No. 1 (March,

1958). pp. 75485.

75O. H. Mowrer, "Speech Development in the Young
Child: 1. The Autism Theory of Speech Development and Some
Clinical Applications," Journal of_Speech and Hearing
Disorders, XVII, No. 3 (Septemberjfl952), pp. 263-68}

31

the Child's first language teacher in our culture, "it
stands to reason . . . that the kind of nurture the child
receives during this important formative period will have
much to do with determining the facility with which he
acquires speech."76
Goodstein cites poorly controlled studies util-
izing a very small number of subjects as factors which
make reliable conclusions regarding the relationship
between personality factors and articulatory disorders
as unable to be demonstrated. He reviewed the literature

in the Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, Psycholog-

ical Abstracts and Speech Monogrephs over a 25 year period,

 

ending with December, 1957, issues. He reported that only
two systematic investigations of the relationship between
parental adjustment and the presence of functional artic-
ulatory defects in children had been conducted during the
past 25 year period.77 (However, when the author of this
study reviewed the two systematic investigations, it was
found that both utilized subjects with organic speech de-
fects, not subjects with functional articulatory problems.)
To continue, Goodstein then summarized the studies on the

personality and adjustment of children with functional

 

76McCarthy, op. cit., p. 515.

77Leonard Goodstein, "Functional Speech Disorders
and Personality: A Survey of the Research," op. cit.,

pp. 359-73-

32

articulatory disorders by pointing out that five studies'
reported a positive relationship between functional artic-
ulatory disorders and personality, with all five reporting
emotional disturbances in the speech-defective child. The
four studies which reported no relationship between per-
sonality and articulatory disorders used the Children's
form of the California Test of Personality, which Goodstein
felt was not an instrument appropriate for the task.78
Goodstein's survey of the literature does not
cover any research which has occurred during the past
decade, although his summary statements are still reflected
in many, if not most, of the medical, educational, psycho-
logical and speech pathology references on this subject.
Kessler, for example, points out in her comprehensive
compendium of child psychopathology that it is "common
professional practice for articulation disorders to be
treated by speech therapists alone. For this reason, plus
the fact that articulation disorders usually do not have an
overwhelming effect on the total personality, " she indi—
cates that psychologists primarily concern themselves with

problems of delayed Speech and stuttering.79

 

781bid.

79Jane W. Kessler, op. cit., p. 130.

33

Pediatricians also tend to feel that unless speech intelli-
gibility is severely reduced, articulatory disorders may be
considered as inconsequential, representing only a matura—
tional lag which time will heal. Medical journals often
recommend that speech defects "as evidenced by stuttering,
cluttering, stammering, or dyslalia should be noted" and
included in Clinical work-ups, however.80
Recent research within the field of speech
pathology indicates that speech defective children,
particularly those with articulation defects, are somewhat
less popular with their peer groups than are normal—
speaking Children, when measured in school settings by

81 In addition, there appears to

sociometric techniques.
be a relationship between paternal occupational class and
articulatory defectiveness. Paternal status is said to
be significantly related to both early speech maturation
for upper occupational groups and to severe articulatory
disturbances in children for the two lowest occupational
classes.82
Such references to occupational class and social

status appear to be confirmed by current research

projects conducted by speech pathologists functioning in'

 

8OKeith Hammond and Hans G. Keitel, "Childhood
Academic Underachievement," Medical Science, (December,
1964), p. 63.

81Marge, loc. cit.
82Weaver, Furbee and Everhart. OELHElE-: p. 174‘

34

Head Start programs. Irwin recently reported on such
an experimental program, indicating that 94% of the children
in the program (ages 4-5 to 6-0) had articulatory errors,
and 71% had moderate to severe articulatory disorders.
In addition, Irwin pointed to a language deficit which
encompassed a depressed vocabulary as well as numerous
misarticulations.83

A relationship between articulatory ability and
language ability has long been postulated. Over a decade
ago, Schneiderman reported that these language variables
showed an increase with growth in both mental age and

84 Among disadvantaged children,

chronological age.
such language factors are reportedly delayed. Head

Start therapists reported that since verbal behavior

was not sufficiently reinforced in the home, verbal
responses tended to be diminished in both quantity and
quality upon school entrance. The stimulus deprivation
found in the marginal circumstances of individuals in low-

income, socio-disadvantaged areas appears to be related

to language deficiencies. The environmental milieu

 

83Ruth Becky Irwin, "A Study of Certain Linguistic
Skills of Children in Project Head Start of the South-
Western School District," Paper read before the American
Speech and Hearing Association's 42nd Annual Convention,
Washington, D. C., November 12, 1966.

81*Norma Schneiderman, "A Study of the Relationship
between Articulatory Ability and Language Ability," Journal
of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XX, No. 4 (December, 1955),
pp. 359-64-

35

provided in such circumstances may also serve to reduce
the attentivity and auditory perceptual skills of such
pre~school Children. Allen indicates that when a child
learns to be inattentive prior to school attendance,
this lack of attentivity reduces even further the
perception of incoming auditory stimuli.85

Verbal language recognition requires that the
individual "be able to organize a complexity of acoustic
events into multitudinous patterns by certain rules of
probability.86 Both attentional patterns and inter-
pretive ability are thus seen as significant factors
in the development of articulatory skills in children.
The phonetics Limits Test, devised by Young, is designed
to measure both auditory perception and interpretive
ability. It provides for phonetic analysis and synthesis
relative to a whole word construct without benefit of
the total configuration. According to Young, even 3 and
4 year olds who showed little evidence of conscious analysis

were able to respond appropriately, thus suggesting that

such auditory tasks are perceived as a sudden Closure of

 

85Evelyn Y. Allen, "A speech and Language Develop—
ment Program for Children in Operation Head Start," Paper
read before the American Speech and Hearing Association's
42nd Annual Convention, Washington, D. 0., November 12, 1966.

86Norton E. Young, "Phonetic Limits of Word Recog-
nition in Children," Paper read before the American Speech
and Hearing Association's 42nd Annual Convention, Washington,
D. C., November 13, 1966, p. l.

36

auditory Gestalten. Children with articulatory disorders
exhibited a poorer performance on this listening task
than did normal-speaking 4 and 5 year olds. It was
postulated that there may be a relationship between the
child's auditory perception and integration of certain
phonemes and his own specific articulation errors.87
Allied studies report a variety of auditory-
perceptual performances by speech-defective children which
are less adequate than performances by normal Children.
Kronvall reports that delay in discriminative auditory
skills may be due to a slow maturation of this function
in children with defective articulation.88 Masland and
Case state that auditory behavior is a "most important
aspect of language development, when factors of mental
retardation, impairment of hearing acuity, and emotional

n89

illness have been ruled out. They considered four
facets of auditory memory in their study: (1) Memory

span, which included not only duration of auditory atten-

 

tion, but also the number of bits of auditory information
which can be recalled in relation to the rate of occurrence,

(2) sequence, the order in which auditory events are

 

87Ibid., pp. 8-9.
88

Kronvall, loC. cit.

89Mary Wooton Masland and Linda W. Case, "Limita-
tion of Auditory Memory as a Factor in Delayed Language
DevelOpment," De Therapia Vocis et Loquelae, et Phoniatriae,
XIII Congressus Vendobonae Anno MCMLXV Acta, p. 81.

37

recalled, (3) petterning of stress, inflection and rhythm,

 

and (4) patterning of phonetic detail. All of these are

 

presumably related to the process of serial order temporal
integration, which is the basis for the language process
itself. The authors concluded that children with artic-
ulatory difficulties reveal aberrations of auditory memory,
as defined in their study.90
A well-designed and controlled study, although with
a limited N, indicates that children whose verbal communi-
cation difficulties are related to maturational lags have
both short auditory memory spans and undifferentiated
auditory discrimination. Auditory-perceptual Gestalten
is reportedly poor and language reception is diffuse.
Among other symptoms, these children reveal defective
articulation, immature syntax, primitive sentence con-
struction and awkward formulations?l
A considerable number of studies also reveal that
not only is auditory memory decreased in severely artic-

ulatory—defective Children, but that selected motor skills

2
are also depressed.9 In a recent unpublished report,

 

90Ibid., p. 82.

91Katrina De Hirsch, Jeannette Jefferson Jansky and
William S. Langford, Predicting Reading Failure: A Prelim-
inary Study, (New York: Harper & Row, 1966), p. 88.

 

92T. David Prins, "Motor and Auditory Abilities in
Different Groups of Children with Articulatory Deviations,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, V, No. 2 (June,
1962), pp. 161-68.

 

38

Luper and Price found that children with articulation
problems "were differentiated from Children with normal
speech on tests of auditory perception and auditory motor
I
perception.93
There is not unanimity among the studies, however.
Sandy states, based on a study involving an N of 132, that
even though past studies suggest positive relation-
ships, this study indicates that those with many
articulation errors compared with those with few
do not display (1) more difficulty with auditory
discrimination tasks, (2) more incoordination in
performance of movements necessary for successful
production of speech sounds, (3) no abnormal degree
of feelings, or (4) lower IQ'S a§4measured by the
Pintner-Cunningham Primary Test.
Winitz and Lawrence in a study of 96 kindergarten children
with good and poor articulation found them to be equally
facile in learning to perform a sound task consisting of
sounds not present in the English language, and concluded
that their findings contraindicate the presence of any
factors, either physical or psychological, that inhibit
or decelerate "sound learning ability."95
The area of articulatory skills as related to

gross and fine motor abilities has also been explored.

Jenkins and Lohr evaluated 80 subjects at the first grade

 

93Letter from Harold L. Luper, Ph. D., Head of the
Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, The University
of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, December 8, 1966.

9"Don Sandy, "Auditory discrimination and Articu-
lation Proficiency of Kindergarten Children," Dissertation
Abstracts, XXVI, No. 8, p. 4891.

95Winitiz and Lawrence, loc. cit.

 

39

level, with no known emotional or physical disabilities,
utilizing the Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency. They
reported that the children with severe articulatory defects
had more difficulty in motor proficiency than did Children
without severe articulation disorders.96

Difficulty with fine motor tasks, such as that
measured by the W180 digit-symbol sub-test, was also found
in a study of 18 children with a median age of 9 years who
had severe articulatory disturbances. While this study
may be viewed as simply another visual-motor task, and the
results interpreted as another example of motoric deficiency
on the part of severely articulatory-defective children, the
authors chose this particular sub-test of the W130 as a meas-
ure of anxiety. They based this upon the assumption, held
widely in clinical circles, that children with functional
articulatory defects frequently suffer from excessive
anxiety. They hypothesized that if the severity of the
speech disorder was a function of anxiety level, different-
ial performances should be obtained between mild and severe-
ly articulatory-deficient Children. Using three groups of
matched pairs of 18 Children each (normal-speaking Children,
mild articulatory-defective children, and severe articulatory-

defective children), They report that the "severe" group did

 

96Jenkins and Lohr, loc. cit.

40

significantly less well than did the "mild group or the

97 The psychogenic aspects of articulatory

"normal" group.
disorders will be further explored in the next section of
this chapter.

A discussion of the development of articulation
skills would be incomplete without reference to its
importance as a primary symptom and a major component
of any number of so-called learning disabilities, whose
etiological factors are currently being investigated.

There is considerable confusion and nosological overlapping
among such terms as "general language disability", "specific
language disability", "minimal brain damage", "congenital
language disability", and others.

Clark defines general language disability, when
it occurs "in older children", as an articulation disorder
"other than a lisp" and refers to it as a condition based
upon constitutional and inheritable neurological factors.98
Arnold defines specific language disability (known as SLD)
as related to congenital language disability and a familial,
hereditary and idiopathic syndrome is hypothesized. He

defines articulation disorders as encompassing infantile

 

97E. Philip Trapp and Janet Evans, "Functional
Articulatory Defects and Performance on a Nonverbal Task,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XXV, No. 2 (May,
1960), pp. 176480.

98Ruth Clark, "General Language Disability: Use of
Psychological Tests in Diagnosis, ' Studies in Tachyphemia,
(New York: Speech Rehabilitation Institute, 1965), pp. 87-91.

41

dyslalia, residual dyslalia, and pararthric speech.
Linked with psycho-motor disabilities known as motor
infantilism, habitual clumsiness, developmental awkward-
ness and delayed motor maturation, the articulatory

99

disturbance is transformed into SLD. Other authors

may classify the symptomatology differently, referring
simply to "learning disorders," the primary symptoms of
which may be dyslexia and articulatory errors, frequently

with "known brain damage" excluded.100

" as a term, may refer

"Central language disorders,
to subjects without central nervous system dysfunction,
although the utilization of the term "central" would
appear to imply such an organic component. For example,
children operationally defined as those "who exhibit
specific disabilities in language and communicative skills"
are seen as having a central language disorder, but are
"not retarded."101

Another term in current use is that of "the inter-

jacent Child". This is a child who may exhibit marginal

 

99Godfrey E. Arnold, "I. Present Concepts of
EtiOIOEical Factors," Studies in Tachyphemia (New York:
Speech Rehabilitation Institute, 1965), pp. 6-7.

 

100James C. Coleman and Malathi Sandhu, "Intellect-
ual Level and Background Factors in Learning Disorders,"
Psychological Reports, XVII, (August, 1965), pp. 69-70.

101Matilda McIntire, John Wiley and William Wolski,
"Central Language Disorders as Seen in a Mental Retardation
Clinic," The Journal-Lancet, LXXXVI, No. 7 (July, 1966),

pp. 374-75.

1+2

or weak "but not altogether deficient" aptitudes or modality

functioning. These Children also reveal articulation dis-

orders and "propositional weakness,"

102

as well as poor syntact-
ical formulation and vocabulary. The interjacent child
would also appear to suffer from a central nervous system
disorder, since Doll points out that "his CNS impairment has
been called 'neurophrenic,‘ (and this) . . . implies that
his abnormal behavior is related to neuropathology. The
organic bases as to site, structure or function have not yet
been Clearly catalogued. Some pediatric neurologists have
reported that present techniques in this field do not permit
precise evaluation of the constitutional foundations but
rather these must be inferred from behavior symptoms."103
Behavioral descriptions abound throughout the clini-
cal and research literature. The language behavior of the
types of children described above almost always encompasses
an articulation disorder. In congenital language disability,
as in many of the other disorders described, it is character-
istic to find the verbal IQ significantly lower than the

performance IQ.1O"

 

102Edgar A. Doll, "Education and the Interjacent
Child," Paper read before 3 Vanguard School audience at
Roberts Hall, Haverford College, Haverford, Pennsylvania,
January 30, 1965, p. l.

103Ibidc, ppo 3-H.

lo"Godfrey E. Arnold, "The LLMM Theory of Language
Disability," A paper read before the Northern Section of the
California Speech and Hearing Association, San Francisco,
California, April 4, 1964, p.1.

43

There is, as yet, no agreement as to whether or not
general or specific language disabilities, central language
disorders, or even dyslexic children suffer from an organic-
ally-based, but presently non-measurable disorder. There is
consensus, however, that Children with severe misarticula-
tions who are presently Classified as "functional articula-
tion problems" are much in evidence among the children

suffering from these disabilities.

Psychogenic Aspects of
Articulatory Skills

 

 

Myklebust, in referring to the child's need for
emotional integrity prior to the development of normal
language, states that

unless the child continues to identify with the
talking human, unless he finds language enjoyable
instead of threatening and anxiety-producing, he
might reject the world of talking. This means
that disturbed or lack of language development may

occur on a psychological basis as a result of
emotional disturbance.10"

It is almost universally assumed that this process of
identification and the consequent influence of "mothering"
upon young children is an important factor not only in

articulation disorders, but in many other types of speech

disorders.105: 106, 107: 108. 109

 

105Myklebust, op. cit., p. 164.
106Henrikson, loc. cit.

 

107McCarthy, op. cit., p. 515.
108Mowrer, loc. cit.

109Milisen, op. cit., p. 16.

42+

However, very few of the studies attempting to
measure maternal-child interaction and its influence on
subsequent articulatory disorders have been eminently
successful. Andersland reported that only by analyzing
the extremes of the personality test scores given to
mothers of articulatory-defective children was she able to
find a relationship which indicated a positive correlation.
When the mothers were so poorly adjusted as to need psycho-
therapy, she reported that their attitudes "may have a
detrimental effect on their children which might be
evidenced by functional articulatory errors. The mothers
thus identified were found to have needs for achievement
outside the home, to lack motivation for care of others
and to show aggressiveness in interpersonal relationships.110
M011 and Darley, utilizing a similar research design and
identical measurement instruments, found that mothers of
children with impaired articulation but no retardation in
other language areas, scored higher on "breaking the will"
and "taking the natural meanness out of the child." These
mothers also expressed disapproval of children's aCtivities
more than did mothers of normal children or of delayed-speech
children. While trends were noted, no significant differ-
ences were found. The authors explain it in this manner:

A more likely explanation of the lack of discrimin-

ation is that the generally low reliabilities of these
attitude scales make them relatively insensitive to

 

110Andersland, op. cit., p. 89.

45

subtle differences in maternal attitudes. Results

of previous research indicate that differences

which exist between thIII three populations are

probably fairly small.
Speech pathologists and psychologists with wide clinical
backgrounds often report that the child's speech behavior
is indirectly related to the parental behavior under dis-
cussion. For example, Nichols reports that some children may
be willing to pay the price of continuous speech surveillance
but that "others may be resentful that their need for love
is being exploited to serve the demands of society for
clear articulation. Still others may be fighting two
battles, one against a perceptual or physical disability

"112

and another against parental domination. DeHirsh, with

twenty years of Clinical and assessment experience, points
out that dyslexic and dyslalic children reveal the follow-
ing kinds of behavior:

We were struck by the diffuseness of these
children and by their difficulty in mobilizing
energy in the service of a goal. It is
possible, of course, that maternal anxiety
played a part here. . . . Such maternal anxiety
may flow over to the children and inhibit Epeir
freedom to function in a variety of ways.1

The maternal personality structure found in studies which

 

111M011 and Darley, op. cit., p. 384.

112Alan C. Nichols, "Allocation of Time in the
Articulation Program: Applications of Research," ASHA, VI,
No. 1, (January, 1964), p. 9. ““—

113DeHirsch, Jansky and Langford, Predicting Read-
ing_fa11ure,op. cit., p. 68.

utilized children with known organic defects, such as
cleft palate, however, was found to be undifferentiated

from the maternal personality structure of the mothers of

4 l
normal-speaking Children.11 ’1 5

When considering the speech-defective child, him-
self, there is considerable agreement among the authorities

that speech is not "merely verbal" and speech disorders are

n116 Language: it has been pointed out,

not "mere symptoms.
has been viewed by behavioral scientists as a
centrally important variable in understanding
the behavior of human beings. Cognitive, conceptual
and adaptive behaviors have been thought of as
depending to a large extent on functional language.
The heavy weighting of verbal items on most measures
of intelligence bears witness to this fact. The
dependence of language development on early sensory
and motor experience has been highlighted by the7
work of such psychologists as Hebb and Piaget.

Dokecki concludes that a related and complementary point of
view is

that language dictates the way in which an indi-

vidual interacts with his environment. . . . The

important point to note here is that the modern
psychological zeitgeist does not view language as

 

114Lerea, loc. cit.

 

115Goodstein, loc. Cit.

 

116Wendell Johnson, "Are Speech Disorders 'Super-
ficial' or 'Basic'?” ASHA, III, No. 8 (August, 1961),
pp. 233-36. -.

117Pau1 R. Dokecki, "verbalism and the Blind: A
Critical Review of the Concept and the Literature,"
’ Exceptional Children, XXXII, No. 8 (April, 1966), pp..525-32o

47

an ancillary function or one that merely exists
alongside others. Rather, language is seen as be-
ing an important variable affecting other psycho-
logical processes, as well as being affected by
these processes. To put it another way, experience
is important in determining language, but language
is also impppéant in directing the course of
experience.

There seems to be some evidence that personality
correlates which exist in conjunction with articulation
defects may also be effected by age differentials. Templin
reported several years ago that the more severe the artic-
ulatory defect in the college-age adult, the more aggressive
he became. However, the level of aggression was initially
very low. In a study of 49 normal speakers, 37 articulatory-
defective speakers, 15 defective voice speakers and 19
stutterers, the average aggressiveness of the articulatory
defective group was the lowest of the 3 groups of speech
defectives and significantly lower than that of the normal
group. She concluded that when the degree of the articula-
tion defect was considered, however, the subject tended to
become more aggressive as his defect became more severe.119

Children with functional articulatory disorders

are reported to be socially and emotionally maladjusted, and,

 

118113163.

11
9Mildred Templin, "A Study of Aggressiveness in
Normal and Defective Speaking College Students," Journal of
Speech Disorders, III, No. 1 (March, 1938), pp. 43-49.

an :
I.-- -‘

 

1 .[ .umnv we.
. . C _ n 3. o J. 3. .~.
3 E .1 .1 Z .3 0 f 0 .. 1:9.
C .7. -C 3 T C .f. .c T. I. C. It
i. C .5 an E E S ..u c. c. C.
.e .v a... It rv a: .0 and .u c. C»
h. E e a ,. e C. 0 .. a nu nu D. a u
a m r E a: S It 5 a ti Qe(\

 

 

48

in particular, to have feelings of inadequacy.
Children suffering from severe functional articulatory
problems are reported to possess a high level of
anxiety,121 and to be withdrawn and constricted in
their social relationships.122

In a study of 36 Children with functional
articulation problems in Grades Four, Five and Six, with
matched controls, Greenberg concluded that there was a
relationship between personality and articulatory errors
although the nature of the relationship could not be
determined. He noted tendencies on the part of the
speech defective group to be more dependent upon others,
to Show more defensiveness, to maximize frustration
situations, to be less well-adjusted in home and school

and to be more insecure generally.123

 

12oC. Hill, "Problems Connected with the
Intelligence Assessment of Children with Defective
Speech," New Zealand Speech Therapists' Jflurnal, IX
(September, 1954), pp. 7-10.

121Trapp and Evans, 100. cit.

122B. A. Deming, "A Study of the Emotional
Adjustment of Functional Articulation Cases as Indicated
by the Bender-Gestalt Test" (unpublished Master's thesis,
University of Oklahoma, 1952), cited by Spriestersbach,
loc. cit.

1‘3K. R. Greenberg, "A Study of the Relationship
between Articulatory Disorders and Personality in the Inter-
mediate Grades" (unpublished Master's Thesis, Ohio State
University, 1952), cited by Spriestersbach, loc. cit.

49

Solomon, in a study of 49 speech defective Children
with articulation disorders and a matched group of
tlormal speaking children in terms of age, sex, grade
placement and intelligence reported that

. . . the hypothesis that functional defects

of articulation are not isolated phenomena but

appear as a part of the total adjustment pattern

was supported. . . . Infantile and nonassertive

behavior could very well serve as anxiety-redpfiing

devices to meet the environmental pressures.
In another study, Solomon reported that children with
functional disorders of articulation tended to be passive
children who internalized their responses and were
characterized by submissiveness, timidity, and a need for
approval. He hypothesized that these personality traits
might represent a refusal to acquire socially acceptable
functions because of unfavorable stress or environmental
pressures.125 Lerea and Ward also found children who
had been diagnosed as severe functional articulation
defectives as expressing a greater number of avoidant
responses than did children with only a few misarticulations.

They concluded that the severity of a speech disorder

seemed to be related to speech avoidance. They stated

 

121‘LSolomon, "Personality and Behavior Patterns
of Children with Functional Defects of Articulation,"
10c. cit.

125Solomon, "Emotional and Behavior Problems
of First Grade School Children with Functional Defects
of Articulation," loc. cit.

 

50

that
anxiety, manifested by expressed emotions and
avoidant responses in speaking situations may
Einfifiifii‘éi Z‘Sfi‘ifuié‘ii‘éfiiéiii2.353658%“

In a study of children who exhibited poor
language achievement at the fourth grade level, Wait
reported that the anxiety level of these children was
such that it not only may have inhibited language
achievement, but expression of verbal defense mechanisms
as well.127

In a study of children with learning disorders,
Coleman and Sandhu reported that of 364 subjects, ages
7-0 to 15-9, seen at a University Remedial Clinic, 25%
of the total group exhibited speech problems. They con-
cluded that the intelligence of those subjects tested
varied significantly only with the incidence of nail-
biting and speech problems. They found that 13% of those
children with I.Q.'s above 110 exhibited speech problems;
27% with I.Q.'s between 90 and 109 revealed speech abnorm-
alities; and finally, 30% of those with I.Q.'s of less

28
than 89 also exhibited speech problems.1 In a

 

126

2

1 7Mary E. Wait, "Language Development, Anxiety
and Early Socialization Processes," Dissertation Abstracts,
XXVI, No. 9, p. 5255.

128

Lerea and Ward, 0p. cit., p. 269.

Coleman and Sandhu, op. cit., pp. 69-70.

51

separate study, Tjossen, Hansen and Ripley reported that
58% of the underachievers they evaluated and 66% of the
children exhibiting enuresis also had Speech problems.
Speech was reported as "immature” and characterized by
substitutions and omissions of speech sounds.129
In a review of schizophrenic speech behavior,
Burk and Saxman indicated that objective information about
the speech characteristics of schizophrenics is limited
and inconclusive. Although much attention has been given
to the language and thought patterns of psychotics and
to their verbal behavior, the authors indicate that the
emphasis has been primarily on the content of speech.130
They do, however, cite a study by Weiss which indicates
that there were sharp differences in disturbances of
articulation among various groups of schizophrenics.131

They also report that Green surveyed the speech of

1,891 psychatric patients and found a mean of 8.45

 

129T. D. Tjossen, T. J. Hansen, and H. J.
Ripley, "An Investigation of Reading Difficulty in Young
Children," American Journal of Psychiatny, CXVIII, No.
12 (June, 1962), pp. 1104-1113.

130K. W. Burk and J. H. Saxman, Acoustic
Analysis of Schizophrenic Speech Behavior, Sponsored by
the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health,
National Institute of Mental Health, Grant No. NH 07112,
Purdue University (Lafayette, Indiana: By the authors,
December, 1965), p. 10.

131D. A. Weiss, "Logopedic Observations in a
Mental Hospital," Folia Phoniatrica, XVI, pp. 130-138,
cited by Burk_and Saxman, ibid., p. 11.

 

52

articulatory errors.132

In a study of the communication patterns of
schizophrenic Children, focusing clincically on speech
and voice production, and sub-grouped as "reactive behavior
disorders" and "Childhood schizophrenia," it was found that

in articulation, specific sound distortions
are common to both the schizophrenic and be-
havior disorder groups. Complete omission
of normally acquired sounds or substitutions
is more frequent, howevig3 among the 12
schizophrenic Children.

The author of the present study evaluated the
speech and language of 60 emotionally-disturbed, hospital-
ized children in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Of the 60 children
examined, 28 displayed significant articulatory difficult-
ies. In a longitudinal study of this group, it was dis-
covered that 66% of the group had received from one to
7 years of public school speech therapy for "functional
articulatory disorders" prior to commitment to the
hospital for the insane. When these children were com-

pared with other institutionalized children who did not

possess such speech defects, they revealed significantly

 

132Antje E. Green, "Speech of Psychiatric
Patients: A Hospital Survey," (unpublished Master's
Thesis, Purdue University, 1962), cited by Burk and
Saxman, 0p. cit., pp. 9-10.

133w1111am Goldfarb, Patricia Braunstein, and
Irving Lorge, "Childhood Schizophrenia Symposium, 1955:
5. A Study of Speech Patterns in a Group of Schizo—
phrenic Children," Journal of Orthopsychiaggy, XXVI, No.

3 (July. 1956), p. 548.

53

greater self—concept difficulty as measured by a drawing
task. It was concluded that inadequate articulatory
skills and inadequate self-concept, as well as a high
degree to resistance to standard speech therapy tech-
niques, were related.134

In another study of speech defective Children
enrolled in public schools and attending a university
speech and hearing center, projective testing revealed
that 77% of the children revealed significant inter-
personal difficulties. Of the 160 subjects in the study,
15% exhibited a high level of fantasy and unmet depend-
ency needs, while approximately 30% were considered to be
aggressive and action-prone. Children exhibiting
articulation and delayed speech produced more primitive
drawings that did children with voice and stuttering
problems, indicating that the latter two categories may
be reflecting an emotional etiology, rather than a
135

perceptual-motor dysfunction.

Spriestersbach reports on the variability

 

134Katharine Butler, "Self-Concept as a Psycho-
logical Correlate to the Development of Oral Language
Skills," Paper read before the American Speech and Hearing
Association's 40th Annual Convention, San Francisco, Cal-
ifornia, November 21, 1964, pp. 7-8.

135Katharine Butler, "Psychological Correlates
of Speech Defects as Revealed through Projective Tech-
niques," Paper read before the American Speech and
Hearing Association's 4lst Annual Convention, Chicago,
Illinois, November 1, 1965, pp. 1-5.

54

of functioning of speech defective Children in his re-
view of articulatory disorders and current research, and
states
one must also reckon with the possibility that
the adjustment problems of this group of
speakers may be highly specific to their speech.
Perhaps the frustrations of faulty communication
have not become generalized maladjustments. If
so, testing instruments designed to measure
general maladjustment and anxiety states can
hardly be expected to identify the differenigg
between these speakers and normal speakers.

In a study of 30 children, mean age 7-1, who
exhibited moderate or severe articulatory disorders and
who had attended two years of intensive individual
speech therapy at a university speech and hearing center,
it was found that children who improved their articulatory
skills also improved along other dimensions. These child-
ren increased not only in articulatory ability, but in
vocabulary, syntax, parts—of—speech, visuo-motor skills,
and motor proficiency as well. The number of emotional
indicators on the Bender-Gestalt decreased as the oral
skills increased. Conversely, those children who failed
to make significant gains in speech therapy also showed

significant increases in the emotional component of their

disorder as measured by the Koppitaz scoring of the Bender-

 

136Spriestersbach, op. Cit-1 Do 33"-

55

Gestalt. In addition, a trend was noted among the group
who made little or no articulatory gains during the two
year period toward increased withdrawal from Contact with
the environment, as measured by 3 projective tests and the
Brenner Developmental Gestalt Test of School Readiness.137
In conclusion, the review of the literature re-

vealed 3 studies which failed to find significant differ;
ences between speech-handicapped children and their
normal counterparts. Marge, in a study of social status,
found no differences in social position of speech defect-
ive and normal speakers and reported that it

was a surprisng finding since it was expected

that the difference would be significantly

great in light of the traditional view of the

adverse effects of speech handicaps. It was

piggdnggafiftifighgzg;srdgéngs corroborated the
While Marge indicates that 6 categories of speech difficul-
ty were part of the research design, results are not re-
lated to categories of speech defects.

Nelson studied 35 children with functional artic—

ulatory difficulties and reported that his subjects were

not more poorly adjusted than normal speakers of the same

 

137Katharine Butler, "Indicators of Emotional
Disturbance in School-Age Children with Articulation and
Delayed Speech Problems," Paper read before the American
Speech and Hearing Association's 42nd Annual Convention,
Washington, D. C., November 20, 1966, pp. 1~3.

138Marge, op. cit., p. 175.

 

 

 

56

age. However, the level of articulatory competency was
not noted.139
Sandy, who utilized 132 children in his study
but failed to define either the type or degree of artic-
latory defectiveness, found that such Children had "no

"140 The measurement instru-

abnormal degree of feelings.
ment upon which this conclusion was based is not Cited.
To summarize, the great majority of studies in-
dicate that children with articulatory disorders of
sufficient severity do differ significantly from children
with normal or only mildly disturbed articulation skills.
Intelligence Testing Variability

as Related to Articulation and
Language Skills

 

 

 

Intelligence and language skills are measured in

a multitude of ways, both generally and specifically.
Attempts to correlate any one of the many aspects of
these two global concepts result in diversified patterns.
For example, Matthews reports that

in studies which have related 1.0. and onset

of speech, or I.Q. and Speech proficiency, low

correlations have been reported. Abt, Adler

and Bartelme (1929) studied 1,000 children

excluding those with I.Q.'s below 70 and those
who did not begin to talk until after five years.

 

139Nelson, 10C. cit.
14o

 

Sandy, loc. Cit.

 

57

The correlation between age of onset of speech
and Binet I. g. was —-.41, indicating that the
earlier the onset of speech is, the more intelli-
gent is the child. Bangs (1942) found that when
chronological age was held constant there was a
correlation of .39 between speech proficiency and
mental age. In a study of twelve birth-injured
children with defective speech, Doll (1932) re-
ported a correlation of .02 between I.Q. and
severity of speech defect. Schlanger (1953C)
found a correlation of .37 between mental age

and articulation proficiency. Although all

of the correlations are low, they do point to

a relationship between intelligence and degree

of speech involvement.1 1

Milisen, in reporting on the incidence of artic—
ulation disorders points out that

other factors such as intelligence, influence

the incidence of articulation defects; Loutitt
and Halls (1936) found 2.5 times as many child-
ren in classes for subnormals with articulation
defects as in the total school population.

Wallin (1926) stated that defects of articulation
were 'distinctly more prevalent among mental defect-
ives.’ However, as Van Riper (1954) pointed out,
the speech problem may contribute to the apparent
subnormality. Lima (1927) reported that Binet
tests of 402 children with speech defects (type
unspecified) in the St. Paul, Minn., schools
showed a median I.Q. of 97.7, well within the
normal range. This sample, however, must not be
considered random, since it was a school popula-
tion from flpich the 'uneducable' would have been
excluded.1

Powers discusses the intellectual variables of

 

1"1Jack Matthews, "Speech Problems of the
Mentally Retarded," Handbook of Speech Pathology, ed. Lee
Edward Travis (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.,

1957). 99- 538-39.

1"2Robert Milisen, "The Incidence of Speech
Disorders," Handbook of Speech Pathology, ed. Lee Edward
Travis (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957),

pp. 253-54.

58

articulatory disorders thoroughly, and reports that "the

solution of functional articulatory disorders has been

sought by many speech pathologists in differences in

general intellectual endowment. . ."143 However, follow—

ing an exhaustive review of 11 studies, she concludes that

the relationship of intelligence to articulatory deficienc-

ies

has certainly not been shown to be so close that
it has much predictive value except within broad
limits. At the same time, results of research
are consistent in showing a gross relationship,
particularly for the low end of the intelligence
range. Except for the greater incidence of
articulatory deficiency among mentally retarded
individuals, intelligence appears to be relative-
1y unimportant as a determining factor in articu-
latory disorders, at least above the age range
during which most speech learning takes place.

In short, during infancy and the preschool years
intelligence appears to be an important factor in
articulation growth. Above that level intelligence
bears only a general relationship to articulatory
proficiency except when intelligence is below
normal limits whep it unquestionably affects
speech adequacy.l 4

Powers, in a later review of clinical and educa-

tional procedures, indicates her bias regarding the interp-

retation of 1.0. testing.

With children handicapped in speech it is
necessary to be cautious in interpreting
intelligence test results. Even when an artic-
ulation problem is not severe enough to inter-

 

1"3Powers, op. cit., p. 748.

144Ibid., p. 750.

59

fere with intelligibility, it may still inhibit

the child sufficiently so that he fails to make

a maximum effort in giving test responses. The

intelligence of speech-handicapped children is

frequently underestimated on standardized tests.

On the other hand, we cannot assume that a child's

intelligence is higher than the obtained test

result merely because he has a speech problem.

It is always advisable to check the results of a

'verbal' type of test, like the Stanford-Binet,

with a 'non-verbal' or 'performance' test. A

test such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for

Children (Wechsler, 1949) has the advantage

of including both a verbal and a performance”L

scale, each yielding an independent rating. 5
Just such a study is reported by Vandemark and Mann. They
studied oral language development and achievement in
100 matched subjects, 50 of whom had defective articula-
tion and 50 with normal speech. Language scores were
derived from language samples in terms of mean length of
response, structural complexity, mean of 5 longest
responses, number of different words, type-token ratio,
and standard deviation of the response length. Only
structural complexity scores provided significant dif-
ferences between the groups. In addition, the Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children was administered and the
performance of the experimental and control groups com-
pared by analysis of covariance. The Performance Scale
of the W180 was chosen as the covariant because it was

felt to be less dependent upon verbalization and therefona

 

1"5Margaret Hall Powers, "Clinical and Educa-
tional Procedures in Functional Disorders of Articulation,’
Handbook of Speech Pathology, ed. Lee Edward Travis
(New York: Appleton—Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957), p. 771.

 

60

should have been an intelligence measure that was less
influenced by differences in oral language skill. The
authors concluded that
children with defective articulation are not in—
hibited in terms of the amount of verbal output,
but they do perform less well in the areas of
grammatical gompleteness and complexity of
responses.14
Arnold, in a recent study of children with severe
articulatory defects, utilizing the Illinois Test of
Psycholinguistic Abilities, reported that
most Children with articulation problems have
significantly low scores in one or more basic
linguistic functions, as measured by the ITPA.
Generally, these are in the areas of automatic—
sequential abilities which underlie memory for
patterning and in automatic use of grammatical
structure of languagi4 which is basic to fluent
expression of ideas. 7
Thus it can be seen that grammatical structure as well as
verbal expressive skills of children with articulatory dis-
turbances may be depressed when measured by standardized
tests.
Braen and Healing attempted to identify the most
commonly used intelligence tests by psychologists in measur-

ing the performance of special groups of children, such as

 

146Ann Ahlstrand vandemark and Mary Bachmann

Mann, "Oral Language Skills of Children with Defective
Articulation," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research,
VIII, No. 4 (December, 1965), p. #12.

 

147Arnold. "The ITPA and Severe Articulation
n 02. Cito,.po 7890

Problems,

61

the speech defective, deaf, blind, etc. They questioned
125 psychologists in public schools, child guidance
clinics and centers for the handicapped and found that
48% utilized the standard form of the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for Children, while an additional 25% utilized the
WISC with modifications for speech defective children.
The Stanford-Binet, Grace-Arthur, and Wechsler~Bellevue
were also used, but to a lesser extent. They expressed
the opinion that

from the results of this survey, it is apparent

that a good proportion of the respnndents prefer

to compare the score a handicapped child achdiyed

with the norms available on normal Children.
Darley, in referring specifically to children with com-
munication disorders, points out that the verbal Scale of
the WISC is based upon tasks which require verbal express-
ion, but that the Performance Scale, while not requiring
verbal expression, dpep "require an understanding of
language."149

Goodstein chose the WISC to measure the in-

tellectual performance of children who exhibited artic-

ulation defects as a result of an organic problem. He

 

148Bernard Braen and Joseph M. Masling, "In-
telligence Tests Used with Special Groups of Children,"
Exceptional Children, XXVI, No. 1 (September, 1959), p. 45.

149Frederick Darley, Diagnosis and Appraisal
of Communication Disorders (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, 1964), pp. 106-107.

62

concluded that
it is Clearly evident . . . that the intellectual
impairment of these children with cleft lips and
p:%:§i:c%3ado:£iddpsEggtia1 in the area of verbal
As indicated earlier, children from culturally
disadvantaged environments reflect not only greater artic-
ulatory immaturity, but also reveal difficulty in audi—
tory discrimination. In addition, there are low but r
significant relationships between individual measures of
intelligence, achievement and information, as well as
vocabulary, as measured by the WISC.151
In an attempt to measure the intellectual
patterns of gifted, average, and retarded children on
the WISC, Gallagher and Lucito found that mentally re-
tarded children, who are known to have a high percentage
of articulatory disorders, also did the most poorly on
the Vocabulary and Information sub-tests of the WISC. On
the other hand, the gifted Children tended to score
highest in tests involving verbal comprehension, includ—

ing Information, Similarities, Comprehension, and Vocab-

ulary. The average child in both the Gallagher and Lucito

 

150
Leonard Goodstein, "Intellectual Impairment in

Children withCleft Palates," Journal of Speech and Hearing
Research, Iv, No. 3 (September, 1961), p. 292.

 

151Doris LOper, "Auditory Discrimination, Intelli-
gence, Achievement and Background of Experience and Infor—
mation in a Culturally Disadvantaged First Grade Population,’
Dissertation Abstracts, XXVI, No. 10, p. 5873.

 

63

sample and in the original standardization sample as re-
ported by the Psychological Corporation, differs from
both the gifted and retarded child. While there was no
relationship found between the average and retarded
samples, there was a negative relationship between the
patterns of the gifted sample and the average group. The
authors point out that only the gifted sample appears to
excel in verbal skills.152

While such differences as noted above were found
in general population samples, efforts to utilize the WISC
performance to provide a basis for differentiating non-
defective brain-damaged children from emotionally dis-
turbed children present certain difficulties, according
to Rowley.153 While he found no differences between
groups on Verbal and Performance I. Q., in another study
Beck and Lam report that "organics" tend to do more poorly
on WISC Performance and Full Scale scores than on the
Verbal Scale. The possibility of organicity increases

considerably as the I. Q. drops to between 70 and 80 on

4*

152James J. Gallagher and Leonard J. Lucito,
"Intellectual Patterns of Gifted Compared with Average
and Retarded," Exceptionalehildren, XXVII, No. 9 (May,
1961), pp. 479-82.

 

153v. N. Rowley, "Analysis of the WISC Performance
of Brain Damaged and Emotionally Disturbed Children,"
Journal of Consulting Psychology, XXV, No. 6 (December, 1961),

p. 5531

64

the WISC.15" Other authors have reported that such
discrepancies between Verbal and Performance sub-scale
scores may be related to either personality155 or to
specific traits, such as "withdrawal,""restlessness,"
"enuresis," etc.156
In a comprehensive review of Wechsler's work,
Guertin, Rabin and Ladd point out that a Verbal-Performance
I. Q. discrepancy of 13 or more points is not likely to be
spurious in the sense of a statistical measurement error,
but that such "real" differences are not unusual in the
general population until they reach the magnitude of 25
I. Q. points or more. They indicate that while Wechsler
himself felt that 15 or more I. Q. points differential
between verbal and Performance was diagnostically signif-

icant and two or more scaled score units was a convenient

cut-off point, their work indicates that subtests must

 

15in. H. Beck and R. L. Lam, "The Use of the WISC
in Predicting Organicity," Journal of Clinical Psychology,
XI, No. 2 (April, 1955), pp. 154-58.

155Fujiro Shinagawa, "Studies of the Relationship
between Intelligence Structure and Personality Traits: An
Analysis of WISC Discrepancy," Japanese Psychological
Research, v, No. 2, pp. 55-62, cited in Psychological
Abstracts, XXXVIII, No. 4 (August, 1964), p. 651.

 

156Fujiro Shinagawa, "A Statistical Study of Dis-
crepancy between verbal IQ and Performance IQ on WISC,"
Japanese Journal of Child Psychiatgy, I, pp. 403-411, cited
in Paychological Abstracts, XXXVI, No. 2 (April, 1962),
p. 3 1.

65

deviate by at least 5.75 weighted score points from the
mean of the remaining subtests in order to be significant
at the .05 level.157 They conclude, however, that

the frequent occurrence of positive studies

may be regarded as evidence that analysis of

patterns can be meaningful and that something

other than the tool might account for the

failure of research tg provide consistent and

definitive answers.15
They also point out that inferring other personality var-
iables from intellectual functioning is really an import-
ant avenue to diagnosis, although additional work on
"scatter" profiles and patterns has not yet led to more
solid "diagnostic ground".159

Lessing and Leasing provide yet another view on

the analysis of the WISC aubtest variability. They point
out that clinical inference has held that the WISC under-
estimates mental ability when the pattern of subtest IQ
scores is markedly uneven. In a study in which 188 sub-
jects' WISC subtest scores were reviewed, they concluded

that subtest variability does not assist in determining if
the child's potential and obtained WISC IQ underestimates

 

157w. H. Guertin, A. Rabin and C. Ladd, "Research
with the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Adults: 1955-1960,"
Psycholpgical Bulletin, LIX, No. 1 (January, 1962), pp. 1-25.
1581bid., p. 19.

159Ib1d., pp. 2-21.

66

that potential. The authors report that the obtained IQ
can be considered as the measure of the child's potential
ability level.160

For the most part, however, those interested in
subtest pattern variability report that potential and
obtained WISC IQ's are possible and reflect both intell-
ectual and personality variables.161’ 162’ 163’ 16" The
most clinically oriented maintain that even each subtest
item on standardized intelligence tests can tap wide per-
sonality dimensions. Fromm, Hartmann, and Marschak, for
example, report that such tests tap reality awareness,
reality mastery, sensory perception, integrative behavior,
the ego ideal, anxiety (either as an affect or as an ego
defense) and ego defenses.165 In an empirical review of

the Wechsler, Frank points out that inconclusive and

 

1603. E. Lessing and J. C. Lessing,"WISC Subtest
Variability and Validity of the WISC IQ," Journal of
Clinical Psychology, XIX, No. 1 (January, 1963), pp. 92—5.

161J. 0. Field, "Two Types of Tables for Use with
Wechsler's Intelligence Scales," Journalnof Clinical Psycho-
logy, XVI, No. 1 (January, 1960), pp. 3-7.

162Kenneth D. Hopkins and William B. Michael, "The
Diagnostic Use of WISC Subtest Patterns," California Journal
of Educational Research, XII, No. 3 (May, 1961), pp. 116-30.

1530. H. Frank, "Empirical Critique of Research
with the Wechsler-Bellevue in Differential Psychodiagnosis,"
Journal of Clinical Psychology, XI, No. 3 (July, 1955),
pp. 291495.

16"From, Hartmann, and Marschak, op. cit., p. 142-44.

 

165Ibid.

57

inconsistentresults from utilization of such a test as the
Wechsler-Bellevue is not the "fault" of the instrument, but
rather the selection of subjeCts by such criterion measures
as psychiatric diagnosis.166 In addition, Hopkins and
Michael indicate that those researchers who generalize
findings from group comparisons to the individual case,
without making adequate provisions for the great increase
in differential required for significance with a sample of
one become vulnerable to commission of a Type I error.
They conclude, "Obviously, before offering diagnostic
interpretations, one should be reasonable sure that there
is something other than Chance variation to interpret.167

In summary, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children, with its Verbal and Performance Scales and its
numerous subtests, provides an opportunity for measuring
the articulatory-defective child in both language and non~
language areas. It has been indicated that Children who
possess a number of misarticulations also possess some
language deficits, and that language deficits may be
reflected in complex learning and concept formation
difficulties. As Mussen points out

Language functions primarily as a means of communi-
cation at the outset, but gradually becomes the most

166Frank, op. cit., p. 130.

167Hopk1ns and Michael, op. cit., p. 130.

68

important mediator and regulator of behavior.
. . . From the age of five-ang-a-half, almost all new
learning involves language.10

In stressing the importance of language, he adds
According to the Russian research reports, behavior
that is learned with the use of language is acquired
quickly, is highly stable, and generalizes widely,
whereas reactions learned without verbal participa-
tion are relatively unstable, depend on constant
reinforcement, and are easily forgotten. Children
over five years of age function and control their
behavior primarily by means of verbal stimulation;
that is, . 6 . mediated generalization or verbal
mediation.1 9

In considering language skills and the measurement of

intelligence, Mussen concludes that "all useful, valid

intelligence tests are highly correlated with, and

probably depend on, facility in language."170 What, then,

of the child who lacks this "facility in language", this
measure of intelligence, at a chronological age level where

such facility is taken for granted?

Dyslalia and Dyslexia as Related
Linguistic Functions

 

 

Children exhibiting dyslalia, i. e. defective
articulation due to faulty learning, also reveal many

attributes of the dyslexic child as well as the child

 

168Paul H. Mussen, The Psychological Development
of the Child, (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,
Inc.), (1963), pp. 45-60

1691bid., p. 46.

 

1701bid.

69

with specific learning disorders as noted in Chapter I.
Weaver, Furbee and Everhart state that speech and reading
are closely associated in the linguistic process involving
symbolic formulation, evaluation and expression.171 In a
study of 638 children at the first grade level, they report
that there was a significant and continuous drop in reading
readiness as the number of articulatory errors increased.
Therconcluded that reading readiness and acquisition of
adequate speech are to some extent related, although the
proportion of variance common to reading readiness measures
and articulation measures is small.172

In another study of first-graders, selected from
54 first grades due to their articulatory disorders,
Sommers reports that speech improvement was found to sig-
nificantly affect reading skills, as expressed in reading
factor scores. However, reading comprehension scores for
children with misarticulations and for children with normal
articulation were not significantly Changed by speech
correction procedures. They indicate that there was one
exception. Twenty-five children who exhibited severe art-
iculatory defects, defined as 6 or more errors in the 10
consonant sounds used in the study, did show significant

changes in both reading comprehension and reading skills,

 

1710. H. Weaver, Catherine Furbee and Rodney W.
Everhart, "Articulatory Competency and Reading Readiness,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing_Research, III, No. 3 (June,

1960), pp. 174-80.

 

172Ibid.

70

as well as improved articulatory skills.173

Yedinack reported considerable overlap between
children with articulatory and reading disabilities, ind-
icating that 40% of a group of second grade "poor readers"
also had articulatory defects and 38% of a group of cases
identified as having articulatory defects also suffered
from reading disabilities.17" Cass found that children
with reading problems were deficient in sound-blending,
as defined by the 1932 Monroe test, more familiarly known
to speech pathologists as synthesis and analysis of phon-
emes. While these children revealed no known defects in
auditory or visual acuity, they were unable to identify
a series of separated sounds which form a word. This
deficiency was at the .001 level of significance.175

As in the discussion of articulatory skills, the
current research in the area of dyslexia also has a number
of proponents who feel that poor or non-readers have a

subtle central nervous system disorder. Penn reviews

 

173Rona1d K. Sommers, et. a1., "Effects of Speech
Therapy and Speech Improvement upon Articulation and
Reading", Op. cit., pp. 27-38.

174J. G. Yedinack, "A Study of Linguistic Func-
tioning of Children with Articulation and Reading Dis-
abilities," Journal of Genetic Psychology, LXXIV, lst half,

(March. 1949). pp. 23-59.

l7SCorrine Kass, "Psycholinguistic Disabilities of
Children with Reading Problems," Exceptional Children, XXXII,
No. 8 (April, 1966), pp. 533-39.

 

 

 

71

specific dyslexia in medical literature, genetic studies
of reading disability, and concludes that

the evidence speaks strongly in favor of a majority

of Cases . . . (approaching 75 percent) being caused

by neurologiclzafélD impairment or neurological maturat-

ional delay.

In a well-designed study of the test performance

of 50 brain-damaged Children ranging in age from 10 to 14
years of age, and matched in pairs with 50 normally
functioning children on the variable of age, Reed, Reitan
and Hallgrim found that the brain-damaged Children per-
formed significantly less well than the controls on all
tests, with differences between the two groups occurring
more frequently on tests of language function than on
other testing procedures.177 Of particular importance was
the Wechsler performance of the experimental group.
Results indicate that Verbal and Performance total scores,
the Total I.Q. score, as well as Information, Comprehension,
Digit Span, Arithmetic, Similarities, Block Design and
Digit Symbol all were significantly depressed (at the .001

level) for the brain-damaged children. At the .01 level

 

176Julia M. Penn, "Reading Disability: A
Neurological Deficit?" Exceptional Children, XXXIII, No. 4
(December, 1966), pp. 243150.

l77Homer B. C. Reed, Ralph M. Reitan, and Klnve
Hallgrim, "Influence of Cerebral Lesions on Psychologic-
al Test Performance of Older Children," Journal of Con—
sulting Psycholqu, XXXX, No. 3 (June, 1965), pp. 247—51.

 

72

‘was Picture Arrangement and at the .02 level was Picture

Completion.178

Thus, while all of the verbal scale was
significantly related to cerebral lesions, some portions
of the performance scale were not significantly effected
at the .02 or greater level.

Proponents of learning disabilities as expressions
of inner conflicts point out that "a great many learning
disabilities are closely connected with intellectual dys-
functioning" and add that learning disabilities are diff-
erentiated from general intellectual dysfunctioning only
in the fact that learning disabilities reflect intellect-
ual inhibition which is limited to scholastic situations
only.179 Fromm and Hartman conclude that

there is a difference between intellectual lack
and intellectual dysfunctioning. The latter is
often taken for the former, but should not be.
Learning disabilities may be due to a native lack
of intelligence. But many learning disabilities
are not due to a lack of intelligence; they are a
specific form of neurotic dysfunction, a symptom of
a total personality disturbance. Their background
may be either traumatic, or it may reveal chronically
disturbing experiences, preventing ngrmal, anxiety-
free development of the individual.1 0
Support for this view is set forth by Blatt, Allison and
Baker who report that

when Wechsler originally develOped the intelligence

 

178Ibid., p. 249.

179Fromm and Hartman, op. cit., p. 24.

180Ibid., p. 25.

73

scales, he saw their primary function as a valid

and reliable evaluation of global intelligence

and only secondarily as a technique for personality
assessment. With the development of ego psychology,
however, intelligence has been more clearly concept-
ualized as an integral part of the total personality
structure. One of the basic assumptions in psycho-
analytic ego psychology is that cognitive processes,
as expressed in a variety of problem-solving situa—
tions, reflect important dimensions of personality
organization.

The Wechsler scales present relatively neutral an
highly structure situations, and the scales assess
the relative integration and balance of a variety of
ego functions such as memory, judgment, anticipation,
planning, visual-motor integration, concept formation,
attention, and concentration. U

In a study of anxiety related to Object Assembly on the
Wechsler, the above authors reported that those patients
showing anxiety in terms of bodily concern also "scored
significantly lower on Object Assembly than on any other
Performance item of the Wechsler.182

Griffiths hypothesized that the Digit Span sub—
test would be adversely affected by the presence of
anxiety, and found that both Digit Span and Information
were significantly inferior under the influence of anxiety.
Having induced anxiety in 60 college Freshmen by experi-
mental means, he reported that the Digit Span interference

was interpreted as occurring primarily during perception

 

181Sidney J. Blatt, Joel Allison, and Bruce L.
Baker, "The Wechsler Object Assembly Subtest and Bodily
Concerns," Journal of Consulting_Psychology, XXIX, No. 3
(June, 1965):'pp. 223.

182Ibid., pp. 223—30.

74

arui retention, rather than during recall. The nature of
tflue interference was found to be intrusion of inapprop-
:riate thought, loss of interest, Change of attitude and/or
EH1 active psychological withdrawal from the testing sit-
nation.183
In a study of the Children's Manifest Anxiety

Scale and Performance on the WISC, Hafner, Pollie and
‘Wapner report that correlations between the CMAS and WISC
scales and subtests were all negative except for the Picture
Completion subtest. They add, however, that only the corr-
elations between the CMAS and the Block Design and Coding
reached significance at the .05 level, pointing out that
these two performance tests are most frequently interpreted
Clinically as being susceptible to the influence of anxiety.18+
A study by Matarazzo, with adult subjects, utilizing the
Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale and the Wechsler-Bellevue,
failed to reveal any significant relationships, a result
which he reports as

surprising in view of the long and widely held

belief among clinicians that Digit Span especially,
and perhaps Object Assembly to a lesser extent, are

 

183J. s. Griffiths, "The Effect of Experimentally
Induced Anxiety on Certain Subtests of the Wechsler-Bellevue,"
Dissertation Abstracts, XVIII, 1958, pp. 655-66.

182+A. J. Hafner, D. M Pollie, I. Wapner, "The
Relationship between CMAS and WISC Functioning," Journal pf
_Qlinical Psychology, XVI, No. 3 (July, 1960), pp. 322-23.

 

 

 

 

75

vulnerable to anxiety.185

Perhaps it is the age differential which significantly
«affected these two studies, since there seems to be some
(evidence that Children with speech and reading difficulties
<30 exhibit significant variability of performance on the
idechsler Intelligence Scale for Children.

In a study of children ranging in age from 7-0
to 12-9 with no known organic problems, Tjossen, Hansen
and Ripley report that "low scores on the Digit Span and
(Zoding subtests of the WISC appear as possible indicators

of reading difficulty."180

In analyzing the frequency of
developmental problems and behavioral signs of these 24
subject who read at "fourteen grades below normal grade

placement," they reported the following:

Motor awkwardness 10 Nervous Habits 14
Speech problems 14* Allergic Reaction 9
Developmental delay 5— Headaches and

stomach aches l3

Accidents 9

*Speech is characterized by substitution and 8
~omissions of speech sounds and as "immature."1 7

 

185R. G. Matarazzo, "The Relationship of Manifest
Anxiety to Wechsler-Bellevue Subtest Performance " Journal
of ConsultingpPsychology, XIX, No. 3 (June, 1955), p. 218.

 

186Tjossen, Hansen and Ripley, op. cit., p. 1112.
lailbldl. p. 1109.

76

It can be seen that 58% of the subjects in the above study
revealed articulatory disorders and that the prevalence of
the speech disorder was the most commonly occurring devel-
opmental problem.
Research concerning patterns of WISC subtest
scores for poor or retarded readers has specific meaning
.for this study, since defective speech and defective read-
ing are related factors in the communication or language
process. Too, considerable research has been done in the
area of reading retardation as related to standardized
intellectual measures, whereas little or no literature is
as yet available regarding dyslalic children and their sub-
test scatter on such instruments.
In an exhaustive review (1945-1965) of research
concerning patterns of retarded readers on the WISC, Deal
reports that
in many of these studies the results and conclusions'
are difficult to interpret and evaluate. In most of
the studies, the inferences have been based on data
collected on a small number of subjects. Ways of
determining retardation in reading have been varied.
Some of the ways used in determining the amount of
retardation were: from the expected grade placement
level, from the expected level as determined by the
results of the WISC, from the level as determined
by mental age, and percentage below expecteg grade
level as determined by standardized tests.1 8

In summarizing the twelve best studies, she reports that

the subtests of Arithmetic, Vocabulary and Digit Span

 

188Margaret Deal, "A Summary of Research Concern-
ing Patterns of WISC Subtest Scores of Retarded Readers,"
Reading Specialist, (May, 1965), pp. 107.

 

77

(zontribute heavily to reading success, as do Comprehension,
(Object Assembly and Coding. However, low Arithmetic scores
‘were found to be indicative of retarded readers, as were
Ilow scores on Information, Coding and Vocabulary. Other
subtests were variously reported, with Picture Completion
‘being,both "high" and "low" for retarded readers. Three
of the 12 studies reported no significant differences
'between Verbal and Performance IQ, with three others
reporting such a difference as existing, in favor of the
Performance over the verbal Scale.189

Hirst reports that in comparing "mildly retarded"
and "severely retarded readers," the latter were signifi-
cantly lower than the former on Digit Span, Vocabulary
and Similarities.190 Sawyer reported that while it was
possible to distinguish between mildly disabled and sev-
erely disabled readers on the basis of WISC subtests, such
differentiation was more effective at younger ages.19l

While subtest patterns differed, Altus reported
that no significant difference was found between Verbal

and Performance IQ in a study of 25 children reading two

 

189Ibid., pp. 101-11.

l90Lynn Shellberg Hirst, "The Usefulness of a Two-
Way Analysis of WISC Subtests in the Diagnosis of Remedial
Readin Problems," Journal of Experimental Education, XXIX,
No. 2 December, 1960), pp. 153-60.

191Rita Sawyer, "A Study of Discrimination by the
Subtests of the WISC between Mildly Disabled and Severely
Disabled Readers Diagnosed at the Syracuse Reading Center,
September, 1958 to June, 1963," Dissertation Abstracts,
XXVI, No. 5, p. 2594.

78

;years or more below expected level. However, there were
sigmificant subtest differences, with Coding and Arithmet-
ic being the lowest.192 DiNello found no reliable differ—
ences in WISC verbal and Performance total scales when
<somparing high and low readers, with IQ controlled. While
he reported that no unique subtest patterns were revealed,
he also reported that end-of—the-year reading achievement
was better predicted by a combination of Information, Digit
Span and Object Assembly than by the use of reading tests.l§3
Burks and Bruce hypothesized that poor readers
would be relatively weak in those parts of intelligence
tests which resemble vital characteristics inherent in
written language. With an N of 11 good readers and 21 poor
readers, they administered the Wide Range Achievement Test
and the WISC. They concluded that poor readers were sig-
nificantly low on Information, Arithmetic and Coding sub-
tests, but significantly high on Picture Arrangement,
Block Design and Comprehension. Good readers were reported
to be significantly high on Similarities. They concluded
that poor readers, as a group, approach learning situations

in a more concrete manner because of an inability to

 

192Crace T. Altus, "A WISC Profile for Retarded
Readers," Journal of Consulting Psychology, XX, No. 2
(April. 1956). pp. 155156.

193Mario C. DiNello, "WISC Subtest Patterns as
Predictors of Reading.Achievement of First Grade Boys,"
Dissertation Abstracts, XXVI, No. 10, p. 5862. .

79

handle abstractions.194

In a more comprehensive study of 116 subjects
whose WISC IQ's ranged from 80 to 120, McLeod reported
that when adjustments were made for differences in Verbal
or Full Scale IQ, retarded readers scored significantly
lower than successful readers in Information, Vocabulary,
Arithmetic, Digit Span and Coding, and higher on Picture
Completion. It was McLeod's assumption that Coding and
Picture Arrangement, which also differentiated good and
bad readers, were "verbal" rather than performance tests.
He also reported that both Full Scale IQ and Verbal IQ
correlated significantly with Information, Vocabulary
and Arithmetic for both groups.195

In a study of children ranging in age from 12
to 16 (N of 110), Flanary reports that retarded readers
have poor memory functions, conceptual ability, attention
span, and in addition, reveal a meager vocabulary, poor
planning ability and slow psychomotor speed. He bases his
assumptions on his findings that Information, Comprehension,
Digit Span, Arithmetic, Similarities, Vocabulary, Picture

Arrangement, and Digit Symbol are the tests which most

 

l94Harold F. Burks and Paul Bruce,'The Character-
istics of Poor and Good Readers as Disclosed by the WISC,"
Journal of Educational Psychology, XXXXVI, No. 8 (December,

19557. 99- 4884§3.

195J. McLeod, "A Comparison of WISC Subtest Scores
of Pre-Adolescent Successful and Unsuccessful Readers,"
Australian Journal of Psychology, XVII, No. 3 (December,
1965), pp. 22-28.

80

clearly differentiate the retarded from the normal
reader.196 An essentially similar study is reported by
Ellis, utilizing 96 unsuccessful reader» who scored 25%
or more below their mean grade level on the Wide Range
.Achievement Test. His study differs only in that he
found Picture Arrangement to be above the mean perform-
ance of the retarded reader rather than significantly
lower, as reported by Flanary.197

While there has been the general assumption among
researchers who use the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, and the
Wechsler-Bellevue Scales that these instruments measure
the intellectual properties as defined by Wechsler, there
have been a few studies which challenge this assumption.
For example, a study which purported to compare the WISC
Similarities with a "comparable conceptual task", reports
that normal and educationally retarded subjects do not
differ on such a task. Results clustered around average
correlation within a restricted range, regardless of age
or intelligence level. The concluded that the results

suggest that Similarities is not an adequate measure of

 

196Woodrow Flanary, "A Study of the Possible Use
of the Wechsler-Bellevue Scale in Diagnosis of Reading
Difficulties," Dissertation Abstracts, XIV, p. lOAS.

 

197Ellis Graham, "Wechsler-Bellevue and WISC Scat-
tergrams of Unsuccessful Readers," Joumlal of Consulting
Psychology, XVI, No. A (August, 19527, pp. 268471.

 

81

verbal conceptual ability, although they do not define the
comparable conceptual task with which they compared the
Similarities subtest.198 In a study of Picture Completial
items, Saunders reports that success with these items, at
least for the 228 male high school and college students
studied, depended upon 3 orthogonal factors, (1) mainten-
ance of contact (2) maintenance of perspective and (3)
effect of uncertainty, while Wechsler reported that it
measured basic perceptual and conceptual abilities involved
in visual recognition and identification of familiar objects
and forms.199 On the other hand, a few studies have anal-
yzed other subtests and found additional bases for Wechslers
choice of items. For example, the Digit Span subtest util-
izes only non-repeated digits in each series. Wickelgren
reports that digit sequences containing repeated items are
retained differently in short-term memory from sequences
containing no repeated items. He found a negative effect
with repeated items, and a positive effect for non-repeated
items, although the temporal sequence was 5 per second

rather than 1 per second.200 On the whole, however,

 

198H. G. Furth and N. A. Milgram, "Verbal Factors
in Performance on WISC Similarities," Journal of Clinical
Psychology, XXI, No. 4 (October, 1965), pp. 424-27.

 

199David A. Saunders, "A Factor Analysis of the
Picture Completion Items of the.WAIS," Journal of Clinical
Psychology, XVI, No. 2 (April, l960),pp. 146119.

 

200Wayne A Wickelgren, "Short-Term Memory for Re-
peated and Non-Repeated Items," Quarterly Journal of Experi-
mental Psychology, XVII, Part 1 (February, 1965), pp. 1¢+25.

 

82

research has proceeded on the basis of the WISC's consist-
ently demonstrated reliability and validity, especially as
compared to other standardized intelligence tests.

In reviewing the contribution of the WISC to the
psychological evaluation of a child who exhibits specific
handicaps, Spraings points out that

the psychologist does this with three realizations

in his mind. First of all, the I. Q. obtained often

does not describe with accuracy the specific problems

causing the impairment in performance. Secondly,

that often we see wide variability in a child's abil-

ity in verbal and performance areas, and thirdly,

more important the I. Q. obtained, will be the areas

of strength and deficits revealed in the intratest

variability.201
Thus we may conclude that the use of the WISC as a meas-
urement instrument, and the use of the WISC subtests as a
measure of intra-test variability, is admirably suited to
the purpose of this study, wherein the evaluation of child-
ren with severe articulatory disturbances is anticipated
to reveal considerable intra-test variability. Discussion
in this section has disclosed that such intra-test varia-
bility exists when the performance of children with read-

ing problems is measured in like manner. Speaking and

reading are inextricably linked in the communication process.

 

201Violet Spraings, "Implications of Psychologic
Testing for the Detection and Education of Neurologically
Handicapped Children," Paper read before the Seminare on
Expanding Horizons for the Neurologically Handicapped Child,
San Francisco, California, October 31, 1963, p.3.

83

The Influence of Parent-Child Interaction
Upon Functional Articulatory Disorders

While there has been considerable research in
speech pathology regarding the parent interaction with
stuttering children, very little has been done with regard
to such interaction where children with articulatory prob—
lems are concerned.

Simon reviews the development of speech and points

out that speech-learning occurs within a total energy field

202
of interaction between internal and external energy systems.

Further describing the learning process, Simon adds:

The human infant thus appears as an organism with

a wide range of abilities and potentiality for an
infinite variety of responses, maturing in an en-
vironment of multifold possibilities and demands;
growing and developing in an external energy sys-
tem of social pressures which impinge upon the
organism with increasing strength as the child

grows older. In the interaction, therefore, be-
tween the child's potentiality for infinite var-
iety of responses and the presures, forces and
demands of the environment, both differentiation

and selection establish new and adaptive patterns

of response. From the generalized, undifferentiated
vocal responses of early life, the dynamic inter-
action between a maturing organism and an external
energy field selects and integrates the relatively
simple response of speech sounds to respond symbol-
ically to an infinitely complex range of stimuli.203

Milisen reports that dysfunctions of oral language may in-

volve either the participation of the environment and the

 

202Clarence T. Simon, "The Development of Speech,"
Handbook of Speech Pathology, ed. Lee Edward Travis (New
York: Appleton—Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957), p. 28.

203Ibid., pp. 33-34.

an

involvement of the child's physical inadequacy. He sees

as an

"environmental precipitant" the following behaviors

on the part of the parental figure:

1.

2.

Failure to associate the care of the infant with
the noises and movements which he makes during
early infancy. . . .

Failure to reinforce the infant's vocal play sounds.
this results in a reduction in the number and skill
of oral movements developed by the infant.

Failure to accompany care of the infant with verbal
output. This failure to talk to the infant reduces
its comprehension of speech, since comprehension
will come only with the association of speech with
meaningful behavior.

Failure to provide, for imitation, sounh which are
new to the infant. Thus, a skill in producing new
sounds is not developed and practice in making
sounds is reduced.

Failure to comprehend, accept and positively rein—
force the first speech attempts. This is likely
to result in a refusal of the infant to use speech
as a medium of expression.

Overacceptance and encouragement of pantomime as a
tool of expression. . .

Acceptance and reinforcement of irrelevant condit-
ions associated by chance with the speech act.

This results in the maintenance of this undesirable
habit.

Acceptance and reinforcement of infantile speech
behavior, which will result in the maintenance of
this type of behavior.

Undue penalty associated with the speech act. . . .
. . . in some cases there may be a generalized
dearth of reinforcement 8f4 communication and other
learned behavior. .

Powers points out that such statements as above

are the result of pooled clinical experience. Some have

the support of research findings as well; others remain

 

204Robert Milisen, "Methods of Evaluation and

Diagnosis of Speech Disorders," Handbook of Speech Pathol-

ogy, 9'

 

Lee Edward Travis New York: Appleton-Century—

Crofts, Inc., 1957), pp. 2 8-69.

85

unverified. She indicates that

a child's speech adequacy is conditioned by the
speech patterns surrounding him. These patterns

in turn are thought to be conditioned by other
factors such as the educational andcultural level
of the parents, urban versus rural living, and
foreign language background or bilingualism. Other
factors in the speech environment alleged to be
influential are the number of siblings and their
ages relative to the child under consideration,
speech defects in members of the family, and to a
lesser degree, speech defects in playmates and
teachers. . . . The methods of child-training

used by parents, particularly their methods of
speech-training, parental attitudes toward speech,
the degree and kind of attention given the child's
speech, are all mentioned frequently as being
of great influence in determining the various 20F
aspects of his speech and language development. 9

Powers concludes that while stuttering and emotional
factors have long been linked in the literature, function—
al articulatory disorders "are beginning belatedly to re-
ceive more attention as possibly symptomatic of personality
structure and emotional adjustment."206 In her review

of the research, she indicates that studies in the 1930's
variously reported (1) no relationship between speech
sound development and introversion-extroversion in child-
ren ages 2 to 6; (2) normal speaking children were rated
more "talkative“ and "spontaneous" than children with
defective articulation, who were more shy and negativistic

than good speakers, and (3) adults with articulatory

 

20
5Powers, "Disorders of Articulation-~Etiology,"

op. cit., p. 752.
206lbid., p. 756.

m

defects tended to have much less aggression than normal
adults.207

The study of emotional adjustment and children
with functional articulatory defects carried out in the
19MO's, as reviewed by Powers, is highlighted by 4 studies
with only one of the h showing children with this disorder
to be above average in adjustment. The other 3 found these
children to be somewhat withdrawn, less demanding of
attention than children with normal speech and to cry
easily. In relationship to maternal behavior, the Bern-
reuter test scores differed significantly from test norms,
showing the mothers as a group to be more neurotic, more
submissive, and more self-conscious. Fathers as a group
did not differ significantly from the Bernreuter norms.
Maternal scores on the California Test of Personality
also differed significantly from test norms, the mothers
ranking lower in self-adjustment, social adjustment and
total adjustment. On this instrument (CTP), the fathers
rated significantly lower in self-adjustment. It is re-
ported that the social standards of the mothers were very
high in comparison with other adjustment scores, and it
was concluded that children with functional articulation

disorders were expected to meet a set of very high stand-

—.;

207Ibid.. p. 757.

87
208

ards in an atmosphere of emotionality.
Powers concludes by discussing the Mowerian

theory of speech acquisition, pointing out that

the implication . . . is that when the mother

is not a source of pleasure and gratification

to the child the sounds associated with her

become negatively conditioned and the child

tends to reject and withdraw from them. He

is not motivateL . . . to produce sounds him-

self and is thus delayed and handicapped to 209

various degrees in his own speech development.
It is of importance to note that Wood found that parents
of children with functional articulatory problems used
overly-severe techniques of child-discipline, and when
these parents were provided with parental counseling,
the children's articulatory skills improved in therapy
with greater rapidity than did the speech of children
whose parents were not receiving such counseling.210

It has also been found that children placed under

a stressful condition, such as delayed speech feedback,
will not only speak more slowly but will make more articu-

lation errors.211 Whether the stress is provided by

 

2081bid., pp. 757-8.

w

209lbid.
0
Kenneth S. Wood, "Parental Maladjustment and
Functional Articulatory Disorders in Children," Journal
of Speech Disorders, XI, No. 1 (September, l9A5),
pp. 255-75.

211Stanley Ratner, John Gawronski, and Edward
Rice, "The Variable of Concurrent Action in the Language
of Children-Effect of Delayed Speech Feedback," Ps cho-
logical Record, XIV, No. 1 (January, 1964), pp. 47-5 .

88

one's self, as a concurrent auditory event, or by the
stress of parental discipline and its emotional context,
children with functional articulatory problems are seen
as being deficient in both personality functioning and
communication skills.212 Wolpe reports that

since the primary function of speech is social
communication which in itself implies an inter-
dependence in personal relationships, . . .
disturbances in speech would occur primarily when
the interdependent relationship is off balance.

. . . Functional disturbances in speech, therefore,
would indicate an interference in the normal speech
process because of difficulties encountered in

the dynamic interaction between the ego and its
surrounding forces. . . . Speech is part of the
very acculturation of the child and carries with it,
therefore, the emotional impacts that any inter-
action involves.21

Wolpe feels that both the child and the parent must be treat-
ed. She views speech as an integral part of the personality
structure of the individual, and suggests that treatment
be examined in the light of the entire integrated organism,
not the isolated symptom of speech disturbance. In
addition, she states that initial cues may be derived
from the parental attitudes, commenting that

the mother's attempt to conceal the problem may

indeed be a manifestation of her own anxiety,
her overprotectiveness, and her need to foster

 

2122elda S. Wolpe, "Play Therapy, Psychodrama,
and Parent Counseling, "Handbook of Speech Pathology, ed.
Lee Edward Travis (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,

Inc., 1957), pp. 991-1024.
213Ibid-. pp. 992-93.

 

89
the overdependency relationship so often seen
in children with speech difficulties.‘l4
In conclusion, research regarding the influence

of parent-child interaction upon functional articulatory
disorders is somewhat limited, relying primarily upon
clinical opinion and experience. Little research, well-
controlled or otherwise, is available, but the trend
noted would appear to substantiate the need for further

evaluation and exploration of this variable.

Summary

In this chapter several aspects of articulation
which have attracted the attention of researchers over the
past three decades were mentioned: (1) the development of
articulatory skills, (2) the psychogenic aspects of
articulatory skills, (3) intelligence testing variability
as related to articulation and language, (4) dyslalia and
dyslexia as related to linguistic functions, and (5) the
influence of parent-child interaction upon functional
articulatory disorders.

The above were deemed appropriate to the focus
of this study, wherein the effect of a functional articu-
lation disorder upon the sub-scale scores of the Wechsler

Intelligence Test for Children will be considered.

 

2141b16.. pp. 995-97.

90

For the most part, attention in this chapter
has been focused upon the various factors related to the
physiological and psychological integrity of the child
with normal speech as contrasted to the child suffering
from a severe functional articulatory disorder. Such a
disorder was viewed as having an impact upon all aspects
of the child's behavior and performance, particularly
during the elementary school years. The personality of
the speech defective child and his parents as currently
revealed by a rather minimal amount of research was also
described. Where research was lacking, the reports of

clinical inferences were utilized.

CHAPTER III

SUBJECTS, TEST INSTRUMENT
AND PROCEDURES

As was mentioned previously, the present study
deals with the performance of speech defective children
who exhibit severe functional articulatory disorders as
measured by a standardized intelligence test which has

both verbal and performance components.

Subjects

 

Fifty children, ranging in age from 6-0 to 12-0,
served as subjects for this study. There were 14 females
and 36 males, all of whom were enrolled in regular class-
rooms in the public schools at the elementary school
level. Median age was 7-11; mean age, 8-0. Ages were
computed by determining the exact birthdate and the date
of testing, with age computed by subtraction for years and
months, not days, in accordance with the WISC manual.215
All subjects were at grade level and exhibited no known
auditory, visual, organic, or central nervous system dis-

order. Children with known "soft" neurological signs were

 

215Wechsler, WISC Manual, op. cit., pp. 22-23.

 

91

92

specifically excluded.

Mentally-retarded and gifted children were also
excluded, with the I.Q. range of the subjects restricted
to 80 to 126. Mean I.Q. for all subjects was 97, well
within the average range of 90 to 110 I. Q. Subjects
‘were monolingual and from lower—middle and middle-middle
socioeconomic levels.

Subjects were diagnosed as possessing a function-
al articulatory defect of a severe degree following a
complete articulation examination, an oral peripheral
examination, audiometric screening, and gross and fine
motor testing. Each subject had been previously enrolled
in public school speech therapy fora minimum of one
year, and at the time of the study, speech production was
characterized by 5 or more misarticulated phonemes,
occurring consistently in at least two of the 3 consonant
positions (initial, medial, and final) in single word
utterances. Audiometric screening was conducted by a
qualified audiologist and the speech evaluation was con-
ducted by a speech pathologist holding the Certificate of
Clinical Competency (formerly Advanced Speech Certification)

in the American Speech and Hearing Association.

Test Instrument
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children was
administered to the 50 subjects in accordance with stand-

ard procedures by a qualified psychologist, as licensed

93

by the Psychologist's Registration Act of Michigan.
Eleven of the 12 sub—tests were administered, with Mazes
being omitted. Of the 500 subtests administered, it was
possible to complete all but 8, those being terminated
due to subject fatigue or examination interruption. In
this study, the control group scores are those of the
standardization population of the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for Children.

As previously noted, the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale is composed of a series of sub-tests divided into
Verbal and Performance Scales. The presumptive meaning
of these tests, as indicated by Wechsler and others, is

summarized below.

Information TEst
This test is said to reveal a subject's range
of information and to indicate his alertness towards the
world about him, as well as to reflect social and cultural
values. It presupposes a normal or average opportunity
to receive verbal information according to some examiners.
Wechsler reports that this test has proved "one of the

"216

most satisfactory in the battery. Experienced

 

216David Wechsler, “The Measurement and Appraisal

of Adult Intelligence, (Baltimore, Maryland: The Williams
& Wilkins Company, 1958), p. 67.

 

94

examiners have found that passive subjects tend to have
inconsistent success-failure patterns on the Information

sub-test.217

Comprehension Test

Wechsler points out that this test might be termed
a test of ”common sense" since "success. . . depends on
the possession of a certain amount of practical informa-
tion and a general ability to evaluate past experience."218
He points out, too, that this test measures sterotypes
with a broad common base, although poor verbalizers often
make low scores. He indicates that this test supplies the
examiner with clinical data, including information on the
subject's social and cultural background.219 McPherson
points out that Comprehension reveals a great deal of per-
sonalized material and appears to be particularly sensitive

to emotional disorders.220

Arithmetical Reasoning Test
Wechsler indicates that the ability to solve
arithmetical problems has long been recognized as a sign

of mental alertness and that this test correlates highly

 

217Marion McPherson, Ph. D., "The Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children," Lecture at Western
Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, November 10, 1960.

218Wechsler, The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult
Intelligence, op. cit., pp. 68¥9.

2191bid., p. 67.

220McPherson, op. cit.

‘with global intelligence. He points out that the tests have
'been devised so as to avoid verbalization or reading
difficulties. He adds

it appears that children who do poorly in arith-

metical reasoning often have difficulty with

other subjects. A number of examiners reported

they were sometimes able to diagnose educational

abiligéis on the basis of scores obtained on this

test.
He also states that when Arithmetical Reasoning is combined
with the general Information Test, the combined scores
frequently furnish an accurate estimate of the subject's

scholastic achievement.2226

Memory Span for Digits

Wechsler points out that this is a poor test of
general intelligence since "the ability involved contains
little of g and, as Spearman has shown, is more or less
independent of this general factor."223 While it is
recognized as a poor measure of general intelligence, it
is an extremely good test at the lower levels. Wechsler
points out that when the low scores on this test are not

associated with organic defects, these scores can be due

 

6 221Wechsler, Measurement and APEFaisal: OP: Cit"
9-70-

222
Ibid., pp. 71

22
31bido’ pp. 70-710

96

to anxiety, or inattention, and correlate with the lack

of ability to perform tasks requiring concentrated effort.221+

Similarities Test

Wechsler states that while Similarities would
appear to be greatly influenced by language and word
knowledge, experience has shown that while some verbal com-
prehension is necessary for minimal performance, sheer word
knowledge is only a minor factor. This test measures the
ability to perceive common elements of comparative terms,
and, at the higher levels of the test, measures the
ability to bring two terms under a single concept. In
addition, it reveals the logical character of the subject's
thinking processes and his ability to discriminate between
essential and superficial likenesses.225 McPherson points
out that while this test measures the ability to abstract
and to form concepts at a verbal level, the early items
on the test are quite concrete. Thus, some subjects who
score poorly may still be able to "abstract" about con-

crete objects.226

Vocabulary Test

Wechsler states that a subject's vocabulary skills

 

225Ibid., p. 73.

226McPherson, op. cit.

97

measure his learning ability, fund of verbal information
and general range of ideas. It is however influenced by
the subject's educational and cultural opportunities.

He points out that the qualitative aspects of the test
also have clinical value, since the semantic character of
a definition reveals thought processes. Wechsler stresses
that syntax in a polished form is not necessary, stating
that "what counts is the number of words he knows. Any
recognized meaning is acceptable, and there is no

penalty for inelegance of language,"227

Picture Arrangement Test
Wechsler feels that while this test, consisting
of a series of pictures which, when placed in the correct
sequence, tell a story, is an effective measure of a
subject's ability to comprehend social situations. He
states that his point of view is that "social intelligence"

is general intelligence applied to social settings.228

Picture Completion Test
This test requires the subject to discover and
name the missing part of an incompletely drawn picture.

Wechsler states that "ostensibly" it measures the indi-

 

227Wechsler, op. cit., pp. 84-5.
228Ibid., p. 75.

98

vidual's basic perceptual and conceptual abilities which
are involved in risual recognition and identification of
certain familiar objects and forms.229 This test usually
shows the highest loading under the visual—motor factor,
but is also related to the subject's familiarity with

the drawn items. McPherson suggests that it is sometimes
useful when the subject reveals borderline intelligence,
brain damage, or severe anxiety, since a low score on this

sub-test tends to confirm such diagnoses.23o

Block Design Test

Wechsler based his Block Design test upon the
Kohs blocks, which were felt to measure non-verbal
intelligence at a comprehensive level. He points out
that he has altered and adapted this test so that admini-
stration time is lessened. He states that difficulty
with this subtest may reveal brain disease, since the
difficulty seems to be due to a lack of synthesizing
ability, "or loss of the 'abstract approach,‘ in K. Gold-

stein's sense of the term.“231

Wechsler, however, feels
that the abstract approach has been greatly overestimated,

and that low scores on Block Design are due to difficulty

 

229Ib1d.. p. 75.

230McPherson, op. cit.
‘2
2"’1Wechsler, op. cit., pp. 79-80.

99

in visual-motor organization.232 Essentially, the test
measures the ability to break a gestalt into its parts

and then synthesize it into a non—familiar pattern.

Digit Symbol (Coding)

This test requires the subject to associate one
set of symbols with another set of symbols. Wechsler
indicates that it is the speed and accuracy with which the
subject does this which serves as a measure of intellectual
ability. Visual acuity, motor coordination and speed also
play a part in the performance of this task. He emphasizes
the over~riding importance of motor speed, except in
cases of subjects with either visual defects or specific
motor disabilities. He also reports that neurotic and
unstable individuals tend to do poorly on this test, due
perhaps to associative inflexibility, mental conquion,
difficulty in concentration, or perhaps emotional reacti-

233

vity. McPherson indicates that there is a strong

relationship between a poor score on the Coding test and

a poor reading performance.232+

Object Assembly

This test consists of four figure form—boards

 

2321bid., p. 80.
233Ibid., p. 81.

234McPherson, op. cit.

 

 

 

100

and the subject is required to assemble the pieces into

a familiar configuration. Wechsler reports that such form
boards have considerable merit when administered to
children, and such administration reveals a good deal about
the child's immediate perception of the whole, accompanied
by a critical understanding of the relation of the indivi-
dual parts. In addition, its clinical value also lies

in the degree of trial-and-error methods and the subject's

reactions to mistakes.235

Mazes
Wechsler reports that he considers both Digit
Span and Mazes (or Coding) to be supplementary tests
to be added "when time permits, or used as alternate
tests when some other test in the appropriate part is
invalidated."236 Coding has been utilized in this study
rather than Mazes due to Coding's presumed relationship

with reading and visual-motor functioning.

Standardization Sample Procedures
Specific Wechsler procedures for the Children's

Scale have been reported by Seashore, Wesman and

‘

235Wechsler, op. cit., pp. 82-3.
236Wechsler, WISC Manual, op. cit., p. 6.

 

101

Doppelt.237 They report that the WISC was standardized
on a sample of 100 boys and 100 girls at each age from 5
through 15 years. There were 1,100 boys and 1,100 girls
in 11 age groups, a total of 2,200 cases. Each age and
the total sample met certain sampling requirements based
on U.S. Census Bureau data for 1940, with correction for
the westward shift of population. Tables presented reveal
the sample distribution by geographic area, urban-rural
residence, occupation of fathers, correlations of each
test with the Verbal, Performance and Full Scale Scores
of the total sample, median correlation coefficients
between tests and the Verbal, Performance and Full Scale
scores. In addition, reliability and standard error of
measurement of all the sub-tests for the three ages of
7%, 10% and 13% are presented.

It is pointed out that the Verbal tests correlate
more highly with the Verbal score than with the Perform~
ance score, and likewise, the Performance tests correlate
more highly with total performance. These correlations
indicate considerable common variance,yet are low enough
to suggest that the abilities included cannot be inferred

for each other, according to the authors. Data suggested

 

237Harold Seashore, Alexander Wesman and Jerome
Doppelt, "The Standardization of the Wechsler Intelli—
gence Scale for Children," Journal of Consulting Psychology,
XIV, No. 2 (April, 1950), pp. 99-110.

102

that digit span production was least like the other Verbal
tests and it was thus made an alternate test. Coding
and Mazes were equally eligible to remain the Performance
items of choice. Coding was chosen only on the basis of
ease of scoring and brevity.

The authors point out the need for clinical
caution in regard to scatter of sub-scale scores due to
the variable reliability, but point out that the composite
Verbal, Performance and Full Scale Scores are highly
reliable. They add that comparison of differences be-
tween individual test proviles should take into consider-
ation the standard error of measurement by test and by age,
and indicate that the unsophisticated reader of their
tables may be confused by certain discrepancies, specific-
ally, the discrepancies between the individual tests, where
the SEm is in scaled score units, and the 3 I.Q. scores,

where the SEm is in I.Q. units.238

Scaled Scores
The scaled scores of the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for Children have been derived in such a manner that
those scores provide, at each age, and for each of the sub-
tests, a mean scaled score of 10 and a standard deviation

of 3. Seashore, Wesman and Doppelt indicate that

238Ibid., pp. 99-104.

103

this was accomplished by preparing a cumulative
frequency distribution of raw scores for each

test at each age level and setting each percentile
point at its appropriate standard score value

on a theoretical normal curve with a mean of 10

and a standard deviation of 3. Scores for all ages
on a single test were then listed in parallel
columns and minor irregularities in the progression
of scaled score equivalents from age to age were
smoothed. The assumption that these irregularities
were chance results of population sampling seemed
to be the only tenable position. Few instances of
such minor deviations were found, and the Scales
are essentially a direct translation from raw scores
to a normalized distribution of scaled scores wigg
a mean of 10 points and standard deviation of 3. 9

Based upon the above statistical bases, it was found that
in the final I.Q.‘s, the mean I.Q. was 100 and the standard
deviation was 15. While there were some small differences
in mean I.Q.'s of boys and girls, the authors‘ state:

All in all, the preliminary studies leading to

inclusion of test items and the sampling itself

were fortunate enough to result in mean I.Q.‘s of

boys and girls which are essentially equal. For

all practical purposes the clinical examiner can

ignore sex differences. A difference in means

of three points, for example, is really a plus or

minus difference of ii points from the actual norms

based on both sexes. 0

Experimental Group Procedures
Each of the 50 subjects, previously screened and

evaluated in terms of speech, hearing, and motor skills as

detailed in the section on Supjects, were given the Wechsler

 

239Ib1do, pp. 104-5.
21”Ibid., p. 107.

104

Instelligence Scale for Children under standard testing
ccnnditions as recommended by the test manual, in a testing
cubicle 6 feet by 10 feet, outfitted with table and chairs
of appropriate size. No distracting stimuli were present.
The examiner recorded all verbal responses of
the subjects and noted all motor responses on the WISC
test forms. Subjects' responses were tabulated. The
raw data for analysis consisted of the sub~scale and
total scale raw scores which were then converted into
standard sub—scale and full scale scores following the
scaled score equivalents for raw scores as provided in
the Wechsler manual. Appropriate conversions were made
when 6, rather than 5, subtests were utilized in the
Verbal Performance Scale, following standard procedures
for the pro-rating of such scaled scores as indicated by

Wechsler in the Manual.

 

 

 

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Each subject was administered the 11 sub-tests of
the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children under the
standardized testing conditions desoribed by the writer
in Chapter III. The Verbal subtests given consist of
Information (Info.), Comprehension (Comp.), Arithmetic
(Arith.), Similarities (Sim.), V0cabulary (Voc.), and
Digit Span (p.3.). As indicated earlier, although the
Digit Span may be considered a supplementary test, it was
included in the experimental design due to its usefulness
in identifying fluctuations in attention, inability to
concentrate, and immediate memory difficulties. The
Performance subtests consist of Picture Completion (P.C.),
Picture Arrangement (P.A.), Block Design (B.D.), Object
Assembly (O.A.), and Coding (Cod.).

As a group, the experimental subjects were tested

on a total of 550 subtests. Eight individual subtest

administrations were incomplete due to extraneous factors,
and thus a total of 5A2 subtest scale scores were calculat-

ed, following conversion from the raw score data.

105

106

In addition, each individual administration
yielded 3 intelligence quotients, based upon a deviation
I.Q. of 100 with a standard deviation of 15. Thus, the
3 quotients, Verbal I.Q., Performance I.Q., and Full Scale
I.Q. yielded a total of 150 I.Q. scale scores representing
the performance of the experimental population. Statistic-
a1 conversion of the total Verbal and Performance Scale
raw scores to obtain the 3 I.Q.‘s was done in accordance
with the procedures as outlined by Wechsler.241

It is to be noted that the Scaled Scores are
derived as to provide, at each age and for each of the
separate subtests which go to make up the Scales, a mean
Scaled Score of 10 and a standard deviation of 3, as de—
scribed by Wechsler.242 Thus the subtests and Scales
and the I.Q. measures are based upon different means and
standard deviations.

In this study, the 692 converted scores were
compiled and subjected to statistical analysis. (The
summary table of the WISC scale scores for all subjects
in the experimental group is presented in Apendix A.)

Statistical Analyses. This study involved utili-

 

zation of the following: (1) a test of significance of the

 

241Wechsler, The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult
Intelligence, op. cit., pp. 34-37.

242Wechsler, WISC Manual, OP. cit., 9° 15°

 

107

difference between means of the intelligence test performs
ance for the speech defective and normative populations,
(2) tests of significance of the difference between means
of subtest performance on both the Verbal and Performance
Scales for the defective and normative populations, (3) a
test of significance of the difference between the mean
scores of the Vocabulary subtest of the experimental
(speech-defective) population, (4) a test of significance
of the directionality of means of the Verbal and Performance
deviation I.Q.‘s for the experimental population, and (5)
ranking of all subtest scale scores as deviations from
average total subtest scores of the experimental group.

The scale scores were subjected to a series of
tests of significance (F statistics) to determine whether
there was a significant variability among and between
scaled scores and subtest scores of the speech defective-
and normal populations, followed by application of the 3:
ratio. In addition, tests of significance were applied to
determine whether there existed significant variability
among the mean scores of the experimental subjects them-
selves on the 11 subtests.

The statistical design is derived from the
assumption that the speech defective group, as a sample
population, is independently drawn from a normal population.

Based upon prior examination of the data, it was determined

108

'that the experimental sample and the normative sample
'were not significantly different on the index of skewness,
both representing independent samples of the normal
population. Therefore, the Central Limits Theorem
applies, which states that for a wide variety of popula-
tions, statistics based on large samples are distributed
'normally, and that ”this applies to nearly all populations
which are likely to be considered in practice."243 Thus
parametric statistics, represented by the Erratio, were
utilized, with the heterogeneity or homogeneity of variance
for nfih being taken into account through application of
specialized formulas for the Eftest based upon F distri-
butions as described by Edwards.244 The statistical
analyses will be found in Tables I through IX.

Inspection of the results of the above analyses
revealed significant differences between the two popula-
tions, in regard to verbal I.Q., as well as the following
sub-tests: Information, Arithmetic, Vocabulary, Digit Semi,
and Picture Completion. In addition, the Vocabulary
sub-test scaled scores were significantly below the Verbal

mean not only for the normative group, but for the speech

 

24
3Helen M. Walker and Joseph Lev, "Inferences

Concerning the Mean or the Difference between Two Means,"
Statistical Inference (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Win-
ston, 1953), p. 141.
h
24 Allen L. Edwards, Experimental Design in Psycho-
logical Research (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,

1960), pp. 94, 105-107.

109

defective group as well. Rejection or acceptance of
the postulated null hypotheses is as follows:

1. The null hypothesis that there are no signi-
ficant differences in functioning between speech
defective children, as defined in this study, and
normal children on the Full Scale Intelligence
Quotient of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children is accepted.

TABLE I

MEAN FULL SCALE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS FOR SPEECH
DEFECTIVE AND NORMAL CHILDREN .

 

 

 

Mean Full
Group Scale I.Q. S.D. Variance F ‘2
Speech Def.
Subjects 97.56 10.85 120.30
(Na50)
1.728 1.42b
Normal
Subjects 100.05 1A.35 205.92
(N.200)

 

as significant at 1.57 for the .05 level of
confidence.

bCritical 3.05 is 1.998.

It is evident that the significant F statistic
reflects the heterogeneity of variance of these two means.
With the application of the appropriate formula for variance
of the difference between two means, with a known hetero-
geneity of variance and unequal n's, the p_of 1.A2 does not
reach the .05 level of significance. Thus, the groups do

not significantly differ from one another in respect to

 

 

 

3

 

110

Full Scale I.Q.

2. The null hypothesis that there are no signi-
ficant differences in functioning between speech-
defective children and normal children on the Verbal
Scale of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
is rejected.

TABLE II

MEAN VERBAL SCALE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS FOR SPEECH
DEFECTIVE AND NORMAL CHILDREN

 

 

Mean Verbal
Group Scale I.Q. S.D. Variance F

Id

 

Speech Def.
Subjects 94.18 10.04 98.77
(Na50) b
2.143 3.26
Normal
Subjects 99.89 14.53 211.12
(N2200)

 

as significant at 2.12 for the .01 level of
confidence.

bCritical 5w05 is 2.65 at the.Dl level.

It is again evident that the significant F statis-
tic reflects the heterogeneity of variance of the means.
In this sample, however, the difference between the two
means is significant at the .01 level, indicating that it
is highly probable that the speech defective subjects differ
significantly from the normative subjects on the verbal
I.Q. Scale variable, and that the null hypothesis may be

rejected with great confidence.

111

3. The null hypothesis that there are no signi-
ficant differences between speech-defective
children and normal children on the Performance
Scale of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children is accepted.

TABLE III

MEAN PERFORMANCE SCALE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS FOR
SPEECH DEFECTIVE AND NORMAL CHILDREN

 

 

 

Mean Performance
Group Scale I.Q. S.D. Variance F

Id-

 

Speech Def.
Subjects 101.72 12.66 147.70

(Na50)

1.45a .7Ab

Normal
Subjects 100.22 1A.66 214.91
(N=200)

 

as significant at 1.57 for the .05 level of
confidence.

b_’(_;_of 1.96 is required for significance at the
.05 level.

The F is not significant, indicating homogeneity
of variance. Applying the appropriate formula, the Erratio
is also not significant, thus indicating that the experi-
mental and normative groups do not significantly differ

from one another in terms of the Performance Scale I.Q.

 

 

 

 

112

4. The null hypothesis that there are not sig—
nificant differences between speech-defective
children and normal children on subtest scaled
scores (and, in particular, the Vocabulary
subtest of the Verbal Scale) is rejected for

5 of the 11 subtests and accepted for the re-
maining 6.

Table Iv, on page 113, displays the mean verbal
subtest scores on the WISC for both speech defective and
normative samples. It will be noted that speech-defect-
ive children differ significantly from normal children
on 4 of the 6 Verbal subtests. Children with functional
articulatory problems differ most Significantly (at the
.001 level of confidence) in the areas of Information
and Vocabulary and at the .01 level of confidence in
the areas of Arithmetic and Digit Span. There appears
to be no significant difference between the two sample
populations on Comprehension and Similarities.

Table V, on page 114, presents the mean per~
formance subtest scores on the WISC for speech-defective
and normal children. Analysis of the means in terms of
the standard error of difference reveals that the two
groups are essentially similar, except for the subtest
referred to as Sentence Completion. On this subtest,
the speech defective group is significantly elevated
(at the .001 level), and it is the only subtest which

is relatively elevated over the subtest performance of

the normative group as well as the experimental group.

MEAN VERBAL SUBTEST SCORES ON THE WISC FOR

113

TABLE IV

SPEECH DEFECTIVE AND NORMATIVE SAMPLE

m

 

Subtest Subjects Mean S.D. Diff. .p

Defective 8.54 2.7

Information -1.46 5.628
Normative 10.00 2.9
Defective 9.56 2.7

Comprehension - .44 1.87
Normative 10.00 2.8
Defective 9.36 2.5

Arithmetic - .74 3.16b
Normative 10.10 2.7
Defective 9.45 2.8

Similarities - .45 1.76
Normative 9.90 2.8
Defective 8.58 2.7

Vocabulary -l.52 5.87a
Normative 10.10 2.6
Defective 9.01 2.9

Digit Span - .75 2.66b
Normative 9.80 2.7

 

93 of 3.291 is significant at the .001 level.

b

t of 2.587 is significant at the .01 level,

While a p_of 1.970 is significant at the .05
level.

114

TABLE V

MEAN PERFORMANCE SUBTEST SCORES ON THE WISC FOR
SPEECH DEFECTIVE AND NORMATIVE SAMPLES

 

 

 

Subtest Subjects Mean S.D. Diff. .p
Defective 10.92 2.6
Picture 2
Completion '92 3'53
Normative 10.00 2.8
Defective 10.27 2.7
Picture \ b
Arrangement '17 '64
Normative 10.10 2.9
Defective 10.02 2.6
Block _ b
Normative 10.10 2.8
Defective 10.04 3.1
Object ; b
Assembly .14 "1

Normative 9.90 3.0

Defective 9.83 2.5
Coding -.47 1.84b
Normative 10.10 3.1

 

at__of 3.291 is significant at the .001 level.

bt of 2.587 is significant at the .01 level and

'I.97O is significant at the .05 level, thus the
above pfs are not significant.
The mean verbal and performance subtest scores for
the speech defective and normative samples by age groups

may be found in Appendix B.

115

Figures 1 through 6 represent a summary of the
data referred to above in histogram form, and may be found
on pages 116-20. The histograms define the mean verbal
and performance subtest scaled scores for the normal and
defective speakers by the six age groups represented in
the study.

Table VI considers the Vocabulary subtest scores
and the mean Verbal scores of the speech-defective sample
in two ways: (1) the significance of the difference be-
tween the means of the voCabulary subtest and the Verbal
Tests, excluding Vocabulary from the computations, and (2)
the significance of the difference between the means of
the Vocabulary subtest and the verbal Tests, including

Vocabulary, in the computations.

TABLE VI

VOCABULARY SUBTEST SCORES AND MEAN VERBAL
TEST SCORES OF THE EXPERIMENTAL
GROUP AS
RELATED TO TOTAL VERBAL FUNCTIONING

 

 

Item Mean S.D. up
Vocabulary Subtest 8.85 2.7
2.118
Verbal Testsa
(Excluding Vocabulary) 9.23 2.6
.82

Verbal Tests
(Including Vocabulary) 9.02 2.7

ap_of 2.010 is significant at the .05 level.

116;

.oub on one moms .mpmxmonm
o>fibomuma tem Hmsboz pom monoow mamom bmmunsm cosmenoupmm tem Hmnhm> smmzuu.H mmbwmm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
   
 
 

mummppsm moanEpophmm muwmpnfim Hmnhm>
> K6
\0 v0 as Vd 047 .910 A S v 0 I/
0 so. at TI... 0.... .01. o I. J o u
0. SC. 80 do mo 88 o w t. m J
I. £8 to . d at. e . o. d o
u . 0 8X. 3 G. u. .
or 4 u . .
w R V \\ a A
1
\ \ \ 1s m
S
0
\ \ \
\ _ a
\ \ \ 1.1.... S
9
\ \ 1m m.
R \ \ 1m w
k L . . [OH
1:”

 

$85on 338qu H.
mswxmoam Hmesoz HE

117

.onm on 0:5 mama .msmxmoom
mbauomuoo can amssoz pom mmwoom madam unopndm mocmELOMAmm new Hmnpw> cmmznu.m mchHm

 

 

 
 
   
 
   

 

 

   
 

 

 

 

as w as s s ‘ 1 H.

m \ m m “ MN m...
x, \ \ \
a a e a
a a :
a a a \
s s \

mg memam Hmanz H §

118

.01m 0» onm momg .wpmxmmam
m>fipomema was Hmsaoz sou moboom canon ummphSm mocmsgoesmm ram Hansmb cmczuu.m mmbon

 

 

    

    

 

    

s s e s . s w

\ \ .im
\

s s s a. a

 

wsmxmoom Hmsgoz H .S

119

.ouma oh man

,. .r n F: .t.’ (L .K.‘. 9..
I1 ) .t . .5; .1 . .C i .. . at I. . .... |. a... , J. . \ .14.). . I . \1 . x a . ,. O .t . . _. mu: all. .v . ,. 0.. v I! . 'O' O ,n 5.. ... 1...- .1 .4
disk .1 o (.... 17m x Lt. H $.5C3 .sc :1. .0 CR0 or. n. H a D.,... .1. or u. 21C .90: six? Manon ash ... H fuss... fr CZ. i r. . 5H...

 

 

88.1003 SIC-{OS 1189311113

 
   
 
 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

. ...... s\ ww . s. H.
a a a m HM
. a a a -3
e \ a \ -.
a s \ \ 1.
a \ a W H...
a. a a “A...

,4

mammal mam H wagon H §

i

.onHH on onoH mmm< .mpmxmmam
m>fieomumm ram awesoz sou mopoom meom unopnsm cosmEsomsoi ram Hmngc> 2mm: us.m mmDon

mpmmbhsm cosmssoupom mpmcpnsm Hmngm>

'>

>

 

 

 
 

 

120

 

       

           

m p m“... a. mm m. H searching H s

         

       

 

 

 

   

      

    

    

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

V was V .x V \ Veer
\\\ \ \\ \\\i
r. a a. a a \_ a a :

.oan o» ouHH mmw¢ .mhcxmoaw
mbfiuomuom can amenoz sou monoom mamom uncunsm mocmEEOMbmm rem ampsm> and: ua.© mmbon

nonsensm anosc>
|l> i?

monounsm cosmssomucm

 

 

121

 

     

\\\\\\\\\\\\.\\\V

\\

           

\\

&.

  

‘\\.

 

V V
\ \
a a.

 

msmxmmam. m>fipoouonHI
name—moan. HmEsozug

 

 

   

    

\\\\\\\\\\.‘

‘SSSsc

       

\\

‘FSSS.

  

‘FSSS.

   
 

\\

a

“5§§SS§§§§§§E

\,
a
a

‘fi

 

 

a

\\

   

m

/ \ 1

V0 MR Vd 0d 80 A S V O I
sq T. at. or. d... 0 I. J o u
Sn... so do mo 88 o m t. m I.
A8 1.0 d UT. 8 . 1. d 0
W fix. . 4 o. u. .

 

 

H
N
mm.
c.
is m
3
m3.
8
mm
..L
We
“run
mo
7%
mm

HO
HH

CU
H

122

It can be seen that the speech defective group's
vocabulary level is significantly depressed below the
mean of the experimental group's other Verbal tests
when Vocabulary is excluded from the computations. If
a significant difference had been found when Vocabulary
was included in the statistical treatment of the signifi-
cance of the difference between the means, Vocabulary
alone would then serve as a predictor of verbal perform-
ance rather than the Verbal Scale in its entirety.

In view of the significant difference in means
of the Verbal Scale of the speech—defective and normative
samples, analysis of the difference in means of the verbal
and Performance scales of the experimental group alone was
attempted, not only for the examination of such a differ-
ence, but also in order to derive the directionality of
the mean differences and the error of the differences.

The results of this analysis are presented in Table VII.

TABLE VII

ANALYSIS OF DIRECTIONALITY OF VERBAL AND PERFORMANCE
SCALE I.Q.‘S FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

 

 

 

Direction of Proportion Mean Diff.E t
Difference of N Differences -
Verbar>Performance 13 4.23
6.98 4.8818
Verba1<Performance 33 12.85
Verbal-Performance 4 ‘“’

agof -3.596 is significant at the .001 level

123

A summary table of individual Verbal and Per-
formance I.Q. scaled scores with the computed mean
differences between these two scores may be found in
Appendix C.

Due to the obtained significance between the
means of 5 of the 11 WISC subtests, verbal and Performance
subtest raw scores were transformed into Test Age
Equivalents (TAE), following Wechsler's TAE statistical
formula, with appropriate equivalencies inserted for the
occasional lacunae encountered.245 It was thus possible
to construct a Mean Test Age (MTA) in months for the
experimental group, and to derive, by ranking a subtest
deviation from the average total score for verbal and
Performance subtests for each subject, for each age
group, and for the experimental group as a whole. This
information is contained in Table VIII, which also reveals
the leptokurtic nature of the sample and the rounding
errors necessitated by conversion of raw scores into
Test Age Equivalents. With few exceptions, however, it
is essentially similar to Tables Iv and V in assaying
the significance of the verbal and Performance subtests,
although it reveals, in addition, the composite scatter of
the WISC subtests for the experimental group. The Picture

 

245Wechsler, WISC Manual, op. cit., pp. 112-13.

124

Completion subtest ranks first, and Vocabulary last.

TABLE VIII

RANKING OF WISC SUBTEST SCORES BY DEVIATION FROM
AVERAGE TOTAL SCORES FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

W

Subtest Rank Deviation from Av.

 

Order Total Score by Months MTA

1. Picture Comp. -+5

2. Comprehension -+2

3. Similarities -+1

4. Object Assembly -+1

5. Arithmetic 0 92.1 nos.8
6. Picture Arrange. O

7. Block Design —3

8. Information -5

9. Digit Span ~13 b
10. Coding -14 101.7 mos.
ll. Vocabulary -15

 

aMental Test Age for 50 experimental subjects
is 92.1 for combined verbal subtests.

bMental Test Age for 50 experimental subjects

is 101.7 mos. for combined Performance subtests.
It will be noted that the relative level of sig-

nificance between subtests as seen in Tables IV and V
are reproduced by ranking in terms of the deviations from
the average total score by months. Conversion of the
latter indicates that the Mean Test Age for the experiment—
al sample is7"years, 8 months on the Verbal subtests, and
8 years, 6 months on the Performance subtests. It will be
recalled that mean chronological age for the 50 subjects

was 8 years, 0 months.

125

Ranking of the WISC subtest scores by deviation
from the average test age scores by the 6 age groups
which make up the experimental p0pu1ation may be found
in Appendix D. A summary table of the individual Test
Age Equivalents and group Test Age Equivalents on the 11
subtests of the WISC for the speech—defective sample may
be found in Appendix E.

The WISC performance variability when considered
by age grouping may be further evaluated by intra-test
scale score scatter of the individual subjects in the
experimental group. Such an analysis may be seen in
Table IX, which reveals an intra-test scaled score ranking
for the combined age groups of speech-defective children.
As may be noted, 6 of the WISC subtests, 4 of which are
non-verbal in nature, appear significantly more often
among the highest 3 scaled scores of the experimental
group. Conversely, the 3 subtests appearing significantly
more often as the lowest 3 subtests are verbal in nature.

Of particular importance are the subtests
Picture Completion, Vocabulary, Information, and Simi-
larities, all of which reveal significant differences
at the .001 level. Picture Completion is significantly
elevated, while Vocabulary, Information and Similarities
are significantly depressed, at the above—noted level.

A total of 5 other tests are significantly depressed at
the .01 and .05 level of significance.

126

 

 

 

TABLE IX
INTRA-TEST SCALED SCORE RANKING FOR COMBINED AGE
GROUPS

Rank Subtest 2
7k
Highest Picture Completion 30.848a
Picture Arrangement 11.443:

Second Similarities 11.443
Highest Block Design 11.4433
Object Assembly 11.443
Third Highest Comprehension 9.459c
Third Lowest Similarities 20.666a
Second Lowest Information 23.428a
Lowest Vocabulary 29.471a

 

aChi square of 16.268 is significant at .001 P.
bChi square of 11.345 is significant at .01 P.

cChi square of 9.837 is significant at .05 P.

Discussion

 

Full-Scale Intellectual Functioning; Table I
reveals that the mean Full-Scale I.Q. of the experimental
group is not significantly different from that of the norm-
ative group. Thus, over-all intellectual functioning may
be viewed as essentially similar, as the obtained §.of

1.42 did not reach the required significance level of

127

1.57 at the .05 level of confidence. It must be recalled
that the design of the WISC permits wide variability in
the Verbal and Performance I.Q. scales which are the
statistical components of the Full-Scale I.Q. This
variability between Verbal and Performance is of the
utmost importance in defining the actual level at which
the individual subject may function under a variety of
conditions. Wechsler reports that the Full Scale I.Q. is
"the best single measure of intelligence," and points out
that the great advantage of using the statistical concept
of the deviation I.Q. is that it reflects the relative
position of the intellectual performance at a statistical-
ly significant level?"6

Wechsler does caution, however, that the Full
Scale I.Q. is not "the only nor a complete measure" of
intelligence and that "intelligence, like personality, is
too complicated an entity to be defined by a single
number."2"7 Thus, while the meaning of the Full-Scale
I.Q. may be limited to a statistical reference to a hypo—
thetical mean, it truly reflects relative position of
intellectual functioning.

It will be recalled that in Power's review of

I

246Wechsler, The Measurement and Appraisal of
Adult Intelligence, op. cit., p. 47.

247Ibid.

 

128

the relationship of functional articulation disorders
and general intelligence, she found that research in-
dicated that such a relationship was not "so close that
it has much predictive value within broad limits" and
that it was "relatively unimportant as a determining
factor in articulation disorders . . . above the preschool
years."2"8 She also infers that the intelligence of speech
handicapped children is underestimated unless an instru—
ment such as the Wechsler is utilized, since a great many
intelligence tests reflect a preponderance of verbal items.
The present study would appear to support her thesis that
over-all I.Q. bears no direct relationship to severe
articulatory disturbances above the preschool years.
Goodstein, in his study of children with articu-
latory disorders of an organic nature, reported that
children with cleft lips and palates were significantly
lower (chi square probability at the .01 level) on Full
Scale I.Q. scores than were the control group scores?"9
Since his matched group study was not controlled on the

variable of hearing impairment, such a significant depress-

ion of Full Scale I.Q. may be due to factors other than

 

248Powers, op. cit., p. 748.

24
9Goodstein, "Intellectual Impairment in Child-
ren with Cleft Palates," op. cit., p. 292.

129

the cleft palate component, but may be related to an
unmeasured peripheral hearing loss, which also reduces
measured I.Q. The results of this study, Cited on page
109 (Table I), are in disagreement with his findings
regarding children with articulatory disorders, albiet of
organic origin.

It may be concluded, therefore, that this study
is in accordance with past research which indicates that

functional articulatory disorders, of whatever degree of

 

severity, are not reflected in over-all intellectual
functioning as measured by a standardized test, such as
the WISC, which has both verbal and Performance components.

Verbal Functioning. The experimental sample of

 

speech-defective Children obtained significantly depressed
Verbal I.Q. scores when compared with the normative
sample, as inspection of Table II reveals. The obtained
§_of 3.26 was significant at the .01 level.

This conclusion tends to lend substance to the
reported postulated relationship between inadequate
articulatory ability and depressed verbal skills suggested

250 251 252

by Irwin, Schniederman, and Allen.

2501rwin, op. cit., p. 3-

251Schneiderman, op. cit., p. 63.

252Allen, op. cit., p. 5.

130

While Doll found such verbally-depressed function-
ing as characteristic of the "interjacent child", he re-
ported that he felt the verbal behavior noted reflected an
unknown neuropathology.253 While this study may support
his observation of the correlation between depressed
verbal ability, as measured by total Verbal I.Q., and mis—
articulations, the etiological significance of the dis-
order was only grossly measured in the experimental popula-
tion by means of excluding known organically-damaged children
and those with hearing losses, and I.Q.‘s on any of the 3
scales of 79 or below. Inspection of Doll's research
indicates that his observations regarding an "organic
basis" for the misarticuktions are not "clearly catalogued
. . . Techniques in this field do not permit precise
evaluation."25" Thus, neither Doll's study or this study
provides a statistical basis for predicting the etiological
significance of the observed results. The effect of subtle
neuropathologies upon childhood misarticulations and
language skills in general awaits the development of
suitable measurement techniques in the field of neurology.
All else is speculation.

Recent research utilizing linguistic instruments,

such as the ITPA, indicates that a "majority" of children

 

253Doll, op. cit., p. 5.

25"Ibid., p. l.

131

‘with articulation problems are found to have significantly
lower scores for verbal expresSive skills.255 Insofar as
the Verbal I.Q. subtest components are related to linguistic
factors and revealed in the Verbal I.Q. itself, this study
tends to support Arnold's hypothesis.

It is relevant to note, perhaps, that Arnold's
clinical research indicates that in "congenital language
disability,"it is characteristic to "find the Verbal I.Q.
significantly lower than the Performance I.Q."256 As can
be seen from inspection of Tables II and III,similar
differentiation may be observed in the obtained group mean
scores of this study. However, it is also relevant to
note that gross differences in Verbal and Performance I.Q.
scores may be found among the mentally retarded group
and the gifted group,257 neither of whom were deemed
appropriate subjects for this study. Thus, it is not only
the significant difference between Verbal and Performance
I.Q. which must be considered by the intellectual perform-
ance level as well.

Gallagher and Lucito indicated in their statistic-
al analysis of Wechsler's normative data that only gifted

children tend to excel in verbal skills, i.e., are signifi-

 

255Arnold, Genivieve, op. cit., p. 789.

256Arnold, op. cit., p. 1.

2
57Mathews, op. cit., p. 542.

132

cantly above the mean verbal performance of the normative
sample. "Average children," defined as 90-110 I.Q., are not
significantly above or below the group mean in Verbal I.Q.,
while mentally retarded children reflect significant depress-

258 Gallagher and Lucito's study

ion in the Verbal Scale.
will be further analyzed when specific subtest performance
is described in a later section. However, it may be

noted that the present study reflects a significant devia-
tion from the reported Wechsler data in terms of the
normative sample for average children in the direction of
the Verbal I.Q. performance of dull-normal (I.Q. 80-89) and
borderline intelligence (I.Q. 70-79). It must be recalled
that Guertin, Rabin and Ladd reported that a verbal-Perform-
ance I.Q. discrepancy of 13 points was required for a
statistically meaningful difference in such data, and that
such a discrepancy is not spurious in a statistical sense,
but that "such 'real' differences are not unusual in the
general population until they reach the magnitude of 25

I.Q. points or more.259 Perusal of the Summary table in
Appendix A indicates that only two subjects from the experi-
mental sample of this study meet such a criteria. An
obtained discrepancy of 13 or more points, which Wechsler

cites as significant, was found for 14 of the 50 subjects.

Thus, inspection of the data in terms of Wechsler and of

 

258Gallagher and Lucito, op. cit., p. 481.

2
59Guertin, Rabin and Ladd, 0p. cit., p. 5.

133

Guertin, Rabin and Ladd's analysis of level of signifi-

Cance indicates that the experimental group reflects the
so-called "average" or normal Wechsler group in terms of
Performance and Full Scale I.Q.‘s but not in Verbal I.Q.
While the data does not reflect the performance of ment-
ally retarded children, whose I.Q. classification is 69

points or below, a depressed Verbal I.Q. scale tends to

be characteristic of children with lower than "average"

I.Q.'s in general.

Non-Verbal, or Performance, Functioning. The

 

mean Performance I.Q.‘s of the experimental subjects did
not differ significantly from the normative subjects.
Inspection of Table III reveals an obtained 3 of 1.74,
while a 3.0f 1.96 was required for significance at the
.05 confidence level. Thus, it can be seen that the
speech-defective children were most like "average"
children in Performance I.Q.

This result tends to agree with the Vandemark
and Mann study reported earlier, wherein articulatory-
defective children were measured on the Performance Scale
of the WISC and on a variety of language tasks. They re-
ported that their subjects were significantly below the
"average" on language skills, but not on Performance I.Qg60

Sandy also reports that children who have "many" articu-

lation errors do not have lower I.Q.'s based upon a

 

26OVandemark and Mann, op. cit., p. 412.

134

standardized non—verbal intelligence test.2-61 Little other
research is available for analysis, since the utilization
of the Performance I.Q. as a co~variant seems to be

limited to the studies mentioned above. Only one other
study, that of Lessing and Lessing,262 appears applicable.
They report that the obtained I.Q. measure on the WISC
rates both the subject's potential and present functioning.
It is possible, then, to conclude that the Performance I.Q.
of the speech-defective children who served as subjects for

this study is both statistically valid and reliable.
Sgbtest Variability. Inspection of Table IV

 

indicates that speech~defective children differ signifi-
cantly from normal children in terms of specific subtests
of the WISC. Children with functional articulatory dis-
orders as a group reflect a highly significant depression
of Information and Vocabulary, as indicated by the signi-
ficant E's of 5.62 and 5.87, both well above the figure of
3.291 required for significance at the .001 level of con-
fidence. Significant at the.01 level were the subtests
involving Arithmetic and Digit Span. Comprehension and
Similarities failed to reach the .05 significance level of
1.970, resultant pfs being 1.87 and 1.76 respectively.

261Sandy, op. cit.

262
Lessing and Lessing, 0p. cit.

 

135

All tests of significance were two-tailed, since such
tests are sensitive to the absolute value of the differ-
ence between means and provides protection "against the
possibility of Meani‘>Mean2 and also the possibility of
MeanI<Mean2," and decreases the probability of a Type II
error, according to Edwards.263

As indicated under the discussion of the sub-
tests themselves in Chapter III, Information measures
range-of-information and alertness to the environment, and
may reflect passivity if the scaled score is depressed.26"
Vocabulary is reported to measure learning ability, fund
of verbal information, range of ideas, and is influenced
by the subjectis educational and cultural opportunities,
according to Wechsler.265 Considering these stated
objectives of the tests, it would appear that speech-
defective children exhibiting severe articulatory problems
will perform most poorly in these two areas.

It is interesting to note that both of the
above subtests are also significantly low for children

from culturally—disadvantaged homes,266 those with central

 

 

263Edwards, op. cit., pp. 94-96.

26"Wechsler, The Measurement and Appraisal of

Adult Intelligence, op. cit., p. 67.

265Ibid., p. 73.

266Irwin, op. cit.

136

language disorders,267 those exhibiting anxiety in con-
nection with "poor language achievement",268 those with
auditory discrimination difficulties,269 and, finally,
mentally-retarded children.270 Since the children in

the experimental group did not come from disadvantaged
homes, nor display central language disorders or mental
retardation, it may be assumed that speech-defective
children with functional articulatory problems may also
be revealing both auditory discrimination difficulties
and measurable anxiety which is interfering with the
learning of both vocabulary and information. In addition,
there is considerable agreement among research workers
that articulatory disorders are related to environmental
and educational conditions. Reduced vocabulary levels
and reduced educational exposure appear to be correlated,

2
according to a number of studies. 71’272’ 273

 

267Arnold, Godfrey. Studies in Tacpyphemia, o ’

.glg.. 09-6-7.
268Wait, op. cit.
269Loper, 0p. cit.
270Gallagher and Lucito, op. cit.
271

272Everhart, "The Relationship between Articula-
tion and Other Developmental Factors," op. cit., p. 332.

Henrickson, op. cit., pp. 95-102.

273Powers, op. cit., p. 711.~

 

137

However, all children in the experimental sample were
enrolled in public school at grade level, and it might
appear that reduced educational exposure was not a
factor in this study.

Acquisition of language, and particularly, of

vocabulary, is seen as a reflection of early mother-child

275

— --- _ A?A‘IJ'.LBZ.CI}

 

relationships, according to Mowrer,27" and McCarthy.

This rationale is currently unsupported by research of

 

any magnitude, since it involves longitudinal designs of
exteme Complexity. If the postulated relationship between
mother—child interaction and vocabulary were to eventuate,
it might be hypothesized that children exhibiting severe
functional articulatory disorders are subject to inadequate
or inconsistent maternal relationships.

A depressed vocabulary score may also have other
psychological implications, as indicated by.Lerea and Ward
who found that the severity of the speech disorder seemed

to be related to "speech avoidance."276

They reported
avoidant responses in speaking situations (i.e., little

use of syntax, vocabulary, etc.), and related this condition

 

24
7 Mowrer, op. cit., pp. 263-68.
275McCarthy, op. cit., pp. 514-23.

276Lerea and ward. 22;_gi§;. pp- 265-70-

138

to the presence of anxiety.

Inspection of Table VI reveals that the speech
defective group's mean vocabulary score is significantly
depressed below the mean score of the verbal tests of
the experimental subjects as a whole, with a §_of 2.11
reported at the .05 level of confidence. When the statistic-
al analysis was corrected for spuriousness by omission of

the Vocabulary subtest from the computation of the total

 

Verbal tests, it was found that Vocabulary, while not
serving as a Single predictor of depressed verbal skills,
was a highly significant portion of the verbal battery.

The reader is referred to Appendix D, wherein
the ranked scores by deviation from average test age
reveal that the age groups 6 to 7, 7 to 8, 10 to 11, and
11 to 12 all show significantly depressed Vocabulary
scores. Information appears similarly depressed in all
age groups with the exception of the 6 to 7—year-old
group. It is unfortunate that a paucity of information
in terms of well-controlled research exists in regard to
the specific meaning of depressed Information scores.
Clinical impressions seem to point to the hypothesis that
when Vocabulary is below the mean, areas which measure
educational opportunities and learning environments are
similarly affected.

Support for such a hypothesis may be found in

the current study, since it will be noted that Arithmetic

139

mean scores also revealed a deficit. Wechsler has

pointed out that Information and Arithmetic may be used

as indicators of scholastic achievement and adds, "Children
who do poorly in arithmetical reasoning often have diffi- FF
culty with other subjects."277 It was also indicated
that Arithmetic does not require a great deal of verbal-
ization although it is in the Verbal Scale of the WISC.
He reported that Arithmetic is felt to measure mental

 

qt
.

alertness and to correlate highly with global measures
of intelligence.278

Thus, the subjects of the experimental sample,
whose scores reveal depressed Vocabulary, Information,
Arithmetic and Digit Span scores on the Verbal Scale, may
be considered to function inadequately in the areas of
academic achievement, mental alertness, and "global
measures" of intelligence. However, a review of the
literature failed to reveal any specific studies re-
garding speech-defective children and their performance
on arithmetical tasks, and the results of the current
study must stand alone in this regard.

As was noted previously, the Digit Span scores

of the speech-defective group are significantly depressed

 

277Wechsler, 02- 0220: P: 69'
2781bid.

 

 

 

 

 

140

as revealed by a £_of 2.66 which is significant at the .01
level of confidence, and these results tend to support
the mass of data regarding the presence of anxiety among
children suffering from severe speech handicaps.279’ 280
There is also a considerable amount of research which F‘
indicates that the identification of anxiety, per se, is

281, 282

somewhat amorphous. The preponderance of the

data, however, appears to indicate a positive relation-

 

 

 

ship between defective articulation and the presence of pr
anxiety in children as measured by a variety of tasks.
This study provides further evidence that on those tasks
which require immediate recall of familiar material, the
speech-defective child may exhibit considerable difficulty.
It must also be noted, however, that the oral
reproduction of digits also requires an adequate degree of
attention to the verbally-presented stimuli. The variables
of recall and attention are presumably based upon the child's
ability to adequately receive auditory-perceptual Gestalt-
en. A considerable number of investigators present
evidence that such perceptual integration may not exist

among children who possess a severe articulatory dis—

 

279DeHirsch, Jansky and Langford, op. cit., p. 68.
280Trapp and Evans, 100. cit.

81Nelson, 10c. cit.

282Marge, op. cit., p. 165.

141

orders. Thus, the depressed Digit Span

mean score for the experimental group cannot be solely
related to either anxiety or inadequate auditory-perceptual
Gestalten. The statistical fact of the defiCit in recall
of digits remains; the etiological significance may only "I
be preferred, since such analyses cannot verify a presumed
cause~and~effect relationship.

Before leaving the verbal subtests, it may be

 

appropriate to comment on the two tests which did not fall
below the mean performance of the normative group, namely,
Comprehension and Similarities. The "average" performance
of the experimental group on these tasks was somewhat sur-
prising in view of Wechsler's stated measurement indices.

It may be recalled that Wechsler reported that Comprehension
was not only a measure of practical information and evalua-
tive judgment, but that "poor verbalizers often make low

"287 Similarities is similarly based

scores on the test.
upon a degree of verbal comprehension, as well as the

ability to conceptualize, first in concrete, then in

 

283

284Kronvall, loc. cit.

Young, loc. cit.

285Masland and Case, loc. cit.

286
287

Prins, op. cit., pp. 161-68.
Wechsler, op. cit., pp. 68-69.

142

288 This study is not in agreement with

abstract terms.
Wechsler's findings, particularly in relationship to the
Comprehension subtest. There appears to be little or no
research in the area of functional articulatory disorders
and Comprehension tasks in the literature to either support
or negate the findings in regard to the current study.
From this study alone, it would appear that children with
severe articulatory disorders are adequate in the areas
of practical information, general ability to evaluate
past experience, and,if Wechsler's terminology is used,
"the ability to perceive the common elements of compara-
tive terms, . . . and . . . to bring these terms under a
single concept."289
Subtest variability Related to Non—Verbal Skills.
Inspection of Table V reveals that only one of the 5
subtests in the Performance Scale reached a significant
difference in means between the speech-defective group
and the normative group. Picture Completion varies sig-
nificantly from the mean performance, and is elevated above
all other Performance and verbal subtest means of the

experimental group, with an observed mean of 10.92, and

a §_of 3.53, which was significant at the .001 level.

 

288Ibid., p. 73.

2891bid., pp. 73-74.

 

143

Since Picture Completion ostensibly measures

visual recognition and identification,290 and reportedly

shows the highest loading under the visual-motor factor,29l
one might anticipate that an elevated score in Picture

Completion would be accompanied by an elevated score in r;
Coding, which is also related to visual-motor performance,

with the added factor of speed of performance.292 Such is
not the case, although Coding, with a.p of 1.84, falls

 

between the .10 and .05 levels of confidence, indicating
merely a trend in the direction of depressed, rather than
elevated, performance. A review of the research indicates
merely that there have been no reported studies on Pic-
ture Completion and speech—defective subjects, and that
the studies which exist in the area of dyslexia report
that Picture Completion is "both high and low for retarded
readers."293

It will be remembered that Saunders reported that
Picture Completion items, for the 228 male high school
and college students in his sample, did not reflect

Wechsler's reported bases of conceptual and perceptual

 

29OIbid., p. 81.
291Ibid.
292Ibid.

293Deal, op. cit., p. 107.

144

recognition, but rather reflected maintenance of contact,

29" Since the

perspective and the effect of uncertainty.
construct of the test itself appears to be in doubt, the

interpretation of the elevated score must remain nebulous.

 

The ranking of Picture Completion as the highest "E8
subtest score obtained by the experimental group may,' :
however, be evaluated in terms of similar rankings of the g
Wechsler normative data by Gallagher and Lucito.295 ;_

mJ

While no direct statistical comparisons are possible, the
Wechsler data and the data resulting from this study
are presented on the following page (Table X). Inspection
of this table indicates that Picture Completion is one
of the lowest subtests of gifted subjects, and one of the
highest of mentally retarded subjects. Therefore, in
Picture Completion as well as in vocabulary and Information
speech-defective children in this sample are similar to
mentally retarded children in the three areas even while
functioning over-all at the average level.

Dyslalic and Dyslexic Intratest Variability.

As indicated in Chapter II, research clearly shows

that intratest variability of specific types exists

 

294

2
95Gallagher and Lucito, loc. cit.

Saunder, op. cit., pp. 146-49,

145

 

.mCmmE no mocmOHuHcmHm no mono» and wcHECms pmopmguca mom xH manme comm

 

 

moapabmafisfim pcmsowsmsm< .poam mcapaswafiafim swam pawam
mundansm
coapmspomcH coapmspomcH soapwshomcH uscsmwcmna< .poam amazon
copra
hsmflsnwoo> humasnmoo> cwfimcm xooflm. .aaoo .poam
coamccnmhaaoo .osoo manpofim .spg manpOfim hsmasnmoo> .
.n.m muncunsm
..<.o ..sfim ..<.m swam pfimflm Homegm pfimfio coapmssomcH ummnwfim
omega
coapcaasoo .poam hansommd pomwno oHpcsanp¢ mmfiufismafisam
mma on m .«.o Ha on s .¢.o Ha on N .<.o ad on N .«.o
cm a z mmuz mom a z m: u 2 we“
mama hoapsm Adana pcamcomzv Assam gmamnoozv Amuse poamnoczv nxsmm
snowman noccam scenafico .m .2 sosoafino cwmsc>¢ cohoaflno cappuo unopnsm

are so mammemsm god nza mean was 20 zmmmqamo msHeommmm mommmm
has amassemm squeezes .moammsa .nmemHo mo minced mo mzamz nmszam

"I

 

zmmqumo mom fiddom mozmeAAMBZH mmqmmomz

N mamVB

 

 

 

146

for dyslexic groups of children. Certain similarities
between dyslexic and dyslalic groups now seem to be
apparent. Flanary, for example, reported that retarded
readers reveal a meager vocabulary, poor planning, and
poor conceptual and memory functions.296 Burks and Bruce
report that poor readers have significantly low scores on
Information, Arithmetic and Coding subtests.297 Altus
reports significantly low Digit Span, Vocabulary and
-Similarities scores, while Hirst reports significantly

298. 299

low Arithmetic and Coding. There would appear to

be some areas of agreement, such as the lowered Information,

Arithmetic and Vocabulary subscale mean scores, which,
of course, are identical withthose reported in this study
of dyslalic children.

However, since the studies of retarded readers
are so diverse in design and, in general, reflect small
N's and simple ranking procedures, interpretation of

the results must be cautiously attempted. It is probable

our. z- 1'.» 7')- .

r").

 

 

296Flanary, 02¢ Cito’ p. 1045‘
29"Burks and Bruce, op. cit., PP- “88‘93°
298

Altus, loc. cit.

299Hirst, op. cit., pp. 153-60.

ii—

147

that there is a small positive relationship between both
dyslalia and dyslexia, as reported by Tjossen, Hansen and

300 and that the consistently positive results

Ripley,
found in terms of Vocabulary depression on the part of
dyslexic groups and retarded readers may also be found
at a highly significant level with severely disordered
speech-defective children. The_results of the present
study would tend to support such a hypothesis, if it were
restricted to children meeting the criteria of severity
of this study.

Intratest variability and Personality Functioning.
While there has been considerable speculation in the fields
of psychology and speech pathology regarding the personali-
ty functioning of both the speech defective child and
his parents, the utilization of a standardized intelligence
test is useful only insofar as the extent and scatter of
the test and the qualitative analysis of the protocols
provides interpretive data rendered by'a skilled examiner.
It will be recalled that scatter was defined as the "inter-
relationship of functions underlying the individual's
achievement on the various subtests."301 Wechsler himself

cautions the use of the test, pointing out that such a

scatter, or "configuration" is "both arbitrary and

 

300Tjossen, Hansen and Ripley, op. cit., PPo 1109-12-
301Fromm and Hartmann, op. cit., pp. 45-6.

148

ephemeral. It should be noted that in test profiling it
is essentially the magnitude of the test score rather
than their configuration with which the investigator is
ostensibly concerned."302 Qualitative interpretation is
therefore usually limited to group measures, in order to “m
yield statistically significant data.

Trapp and Evans utilized the Digit-Symbol (Goding)

subtest as a measure of anxiety with 18 children who

 

exhibited severe articulatory disturbances as compared is
with children with mild articulation problems, and re-
ported that the "severe" group did significantly less
well on Coding, and therefore, presumably were more
anxietous.303 It will be noted by examining Table v
that Coding was not found to be a significantly depressed
subtest when means of the experimental and normative
groups were examined, nor does Coding appear among the 3
lowest subtests in Table IX, when all subtests were
examined for significance of difference between the means
on an observed and theoretical probability basis. On

the other hand, Coding was found to be the tenth of 11
subtests when ranked by deviation from average total

scores, as in Table VIII. Thus, the observed differences

 

302Wechsler, The Measurement and Appraisal of
Adult Intelligence, op. cit., p. 165.

303

 

 

Trapp and Evans, op. cit., pp. 176-80.

149

in relative placement may well be a function of the level
of statistical complexity applied to the task. Simple
ranking would appear to give significantly different
results, which may account for the disagreement between
the above-described study and the present research.

The personality functioning of speech defective
children with articulatory disorders was discussed in
Chapter II, and it was indicated that a great majority of
the studies cited reported that these children differed
significantly from children with normal or only mildly
disturbed articulatory skills. It may now be said, how-
ever, that the statistical bases for these studies was of
limited scope and that few studies utilizing the WISC as
the instrument are available, other than in the area of
Coding and its presumed relationship to anxiety.

The results of this study, as seen in Tables
IV and V, would appear to indicate that insofar as de-
pressed verbal skills may be related to aberrant personali-
ty functioning, to that extent this study provides support
for a significantly different level of functioning between
speech—defective and normal children. The relationship
is perhaps more clearly drawn between the significant
depression of Vocabulary, Information, Arithmetic, and

Digit Span and inadequate school functioning.

150

Since non-verbal skills, as revealed by the Per-
formance subtests, are not significantly different from
the normative population, it may be assumed that the speech-

defective population is not significantly different from

the comparable normative group in the areas of "social E“?
intelligence" (Picture Arrangement), non-verbal intelligence, E
(Block Design), visual acuity, motor coordination and

speed (Digit Symbol-Coding), or perception of visual J

 

Gestalts (Object Assembly).3o" 7*

If it may be assumed that the speech defective
group functions adequately in the above areas, considerable
personality strengths may be hypothesized based upon these
essentially non-verbal performances. It may be that studies
which report that speech-defective children do not reveal
personality dysfunction may be tapping these areas, at
least in part, while those studies which report deviant
personality functioning may be tapping verbal areas of
weakness.

The results of this study, when compared with
the clinical research reviewed in Chapter II, would not
appear to reject the null hypothesis of no difference be-
tween speech-defective and normal children in personality
areas as indirectly measured the Full Scale I.Q. of the
WISC.

30"Wechsler, Measurement and Appraisal 0f AdUIt
Intelligence, op. cit., pp. 79-83.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

While there has been a considerable amount of
research over the years in the area of speech and language,
and in the technical aspects of identifying and remediat-
ing disordered speech and language, comparatively little
is known regarding the relationship of functional articu-
latory disorders and verbal skills as measured by a
standardized instrument which assesses not only several
aspects of verbal performance, but some aspects of non-
verbal performance as well. Speech pathologists are well
aware of the acoustic manifestations of articulatory
deviancy, but perhaps much less aware of their meaning
within the large, more inclusive Gestalt of language
functioning and verbal skills.

A review of the research indicates that general
intelligence is not a unitary trait but is part of a
larger whole, namely, personality. In addition, intellect-
ual functioning, language, cognition, and personality
are felt to represent a reciprocal interweaving of
processes and developmental patterns which may well in-

clude specific aspects of speech performance.

151

 

152

Researchers have been particularly active in
the following areas: (1) measurement of the development
of articulatory skills, (2) the psychological aspect of
articulatory development, (3) intelligence testing varia-
bility as related to articulation and language, (4) deviant
verbal and written skills, as exemplified by dyslalia and
dyslexia, and (5) the influence of parent-child relation-
ships upon functional articulatory disorders. However,
the research in many of the above areas has been based
upon non-standardized tests, inadequate experimental
samples, and little or no differentiation of the speech-
defective child based upon the degree of severity of the
articulation disorder. It was found that considerable
confusion reigned regarding the meaning of the simple
term, "severe functional articulation disorder."

In the present study there has been an attempt
made to provide considerably more rigid controls in terms
of sample selection, identification of the variables.to
be measured, as well as the utilization of a test measure-
ment device which was not only standardized, but reliable
and valid as well.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the
functioning of children exhibiting severe articulatory
defects in terms of their verbal skills, based upon the

utilization of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children,

 

 

153

as compared to the performance of non-defective children
as represented by the mean performances of the standard-
ization groups on the above tests.

The following hypotheses were proposed, stated

in null form: Would there be significant differences in

 

functioning between speech-defective children and normal
children on the Full Scale, Verbal Scale and Performance
Scale I.Q. of the WISC? Would there be significant differ-
ences in functioning between speech defective children and .2!
normal children on the subtest scaled scores? Of particu-
lar interest was the vocabulary subtest, since this test
would appear to be the subtest most likely correlated
with articulatory disorders.
Fifty children, ranging in age from 6-0 to 12-0,
served as subjects for this study. Subjects' mean age
was 8—0; median age was 7-11. All subjects were at grade
level and exhibited no known auditory, visual, organic,
or central nervous system problems. Children with known
"soft" neurological signs were specifically excluded, as
were mentally-retarded and gifted children. I.Q. range
of the subjects was restricted to 80 to 126 I.Q. Mean
Full Scale I.Q. for all subjects was 97, well within the
average range of 90-110 I.Q. Subjects were monolingual
and from middle-class families. Subjects were diagnosed

as poSsessing a functional articulation defect of severe

154

degree, based upon a complete oral-peripheral examination,
articulation testing, audiometric screening, and gross
and fine motor testing. Speech production was character—
ized by a minimum of 5 or more misarticulated phonemes,
occurring consistently in at least two of the 3 consonant
positions in single word utterances, and by decreased
intelligibility.

The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children was
administered to the 50 subjects, with 11 of the 12 sub-
tests being utilized, Mazes being omitted. Each subject
was tested in an examining room 6' by 10', outfitted with
appropriately—sized tables and chairs. All distracting
stimuli were removed. The examiner recorded all verbal
responses of the subjects and noted all motor responses
on the WISC protocols. Subjects' responses were tabulated
and the raw data for analysis consisted of the sub-
scale and total scale raw scores which were converted into
standard subscale and full scale scores, following the
procedure provided in the Wechsler manual. Appropriate
conversions were made when 6, rather than 5, subtests were
utilized in the verbal Performance Scale.

The raw data consisted of 542 subtest scaled
scores and 150 I.Q. scaled scores, which were subjected to
a series of tests of significance for the difference between
the means of the groups. It was found that there were

significant differences between the two populations in re-

155

gard to both verbal I.Q. and several of the subtests,

including one subtest of the Performance Scale.

Conclusions

 

Within the limitations of the present study, the
following conclusions seem warranted:

1. Children with psychogenic speech defects and
those with normal speech reveal no differences in perform-
ance in "general intelligence" on the Full Scale I.Q. as
determined by the Wechlser Intelligence Scale for Children.

2. Children with psychogenic speech defects
reveal I.Q. scores that are significantly lower in the
area of verbal skills than do children with normal speech.

3. Verbal subtests of the WISC, as achieved by
children with psychogenic speech defects, namely, Informa-
tion, Vocabulary, Arithmetic and Digit Span, are sig-
nificantly lower than those achieved by children with
normal speech. However, children with psychogenic speech
problems reveal significantly better performance on Picture
Completion, a subtest of the Performance Scale, than do
children with normal speech who are of average intelligence.

4. There are no significant differences between
children with psychogenic speech defects and children with
normal speech for the subtests which measure Picture Arrange-
ment, Block Design, Object Assembly, and Coding on the
Performance Scale of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for

Children.

 

156

Implications for Future Research

 

While considerable research utilizing the Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children has been conducted by
those interested in evaluating reading disorders, very
little use of this instrument has yet been made in evalua-
ting speech disorders. Since reading and speech are aspects
of a common modality, the need for such exploration would
appear to be evident. In addition, the WISC permits the
examiner to explore 10 to 12 areas of functioning within
a relatively limited time, usually one hour or less.

Specifically, the following areas are suggested
for future study:

1. General intellectual functioning of specific
sub-groups of speech-defective<dflldren and adults, utilizing
the Wechsler, should be studied. Most currently quoted
research on intellectual functioning draws upon Binet test-
ing accomplished in the 1920's and 1930's. The Binet, then
as now, reflects a primarily verbal level of intellectual
functioning. The Webhsler, on the other hand, will provide
additional information by measuring non-verbal intellectual
functioning as well.

2. Since maturation and developmental skills are
closely related to articulatory stabilization, subtest
pattern study of WISC scores of speech—defective children
at various age levels may prove rewarding. The introduction

of another version of the Wechsler, the WSSPI, designed for

157

Children of pre-school age, may prove to be a valuable
test instrument. The current focus on pre-school speech
problems in various Head Start and nursery school program
planning should serve as an impetus for exploration of the
variables of socio-economic conditions, parent-child re-
lationships, and the specific effects of language training
administered under controlled conditions to 3 and 4 year
old children prior to school entrance.

3. While there has been some research conducted

 

within the past few years on the performance of brain-
injured children in both verbal and non-verbal areas,
little has been done in the specific area of identifica-
tion of articulatory disorders, and measurement of language
skills both for the known neurologically-handicapped child,
and the child suspected of cerebral dysfunction. It may
be that initial attempts to measure such groups on the
WISC will utilize "behavioral" diagnoses, rather than
neurological diagnoses due to the problems cited in
Chapter II.

4. The inter—relationship between the Wechsler
subtests on both Verbal and Performance Scales and the sub-
tests of such new instruments as the Illinois Test of
Psycholinguistic Abilities (ITPA) is in need of definition.
There is reason to believe that the Wechsler will remain
the most important standardized instrument and that such

tests as the ITPA will prove to be fruitful additional

158

resources in the armamentarium of the examiner and the
researcher.

5. There is a need for well-controlled research
in establishing the correlation between such subtests of
the WISC as Information, Arithmetic and Vocabulary and the
the presence of a severe articulatory defect. As a con-
comitant problem, the need for a classification system
which will clearly differentiate between the levels of
articulatory disturbance is greatly needed. A review of
the literature indicates that even by phonemic count, a child
who exhibits one misarticulation may be classified as
"severely defective" whereas another may exhibit 5 mis-
articulations and be classified as "normal." Research
which has been conducted utilizing a group of "mild"
and a group of "severe" articulatory-defectivechildren
has consistently found differential performance, although
the basis for the original differential diagnosis of
"mild" and "severe" is relatively ambiguous.

6. While past research tends to suggest that
anxiety may play an important role in depressing the
speech-defective child's performance in verbal and communi-
cative roles, current measures of anxiety are limited by
the instruments of measurement. Additional effort must be
expended in this direction before the concept is statistic-

ally abandoned. The known importance of anxiety in

159

interference with appropriate responses, both verbal and
non-verbal, needs to-be translated into measurable units
and applied to speech-defective children of all types.

7.10fi1e this study failed to reveal a signifi-
cant depression in Comprehension scores on the WISC, there
is little or no research with the particular construct
embodied in this subtest, i.e., evaluative judgment and
range of practical information, which has been attempted
with speech-defective children. Both Wechsler and others
interested in dyslexia have reported finding significant
relationships between Comprehension and the variable under
study. Thus, it would seem that further exploration may
be fruitful.

8. The utilization of the WISC as an instrument
reflecting the verbal skills of other types of speech dis-
orders, such as stuttering, cluttering, voice, and delayed
speech, is advocated. There appear:to be no research
studies applying this instrument to such disparate sub-
groups of speech disorders. It might be suspected that
considerable variation in the over-all patterning may be
found between the various sub-groups. In addition, such
patterning may provide useful clues to the personality
functioning of each of the sub-group subjects, if the
studies provide well-designed, well-controlled opportunities
for exploration, with sufficiently large N's to make

meaningful comparisons.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Andreas, Burton G. Experimental Psychology. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1960.

 

Arnold, Godfrey E. "I. Present Concepts of Etiological
Factors," Studies in Tachyphemia. New York:
Speech Rehabilitation Institute, 1905.

 

Burk, K. W. and Saxman, J. H. Acoustic Analysis of
Schizophrenic Speech Behavior. Sponsored by the
U.S. Dept. of Health, EducatIon and Welfare,
Public Health Service, National Institutes of
Health, National Institute of Mental Health,
Grant No. MH 07112, Purdue University. Lafayette,
Indiana: By the authors, December, 1965.

 

 

Clark, Ruther. "General Language Disability: Use of Psycho-
logical Tests in Diagnosis." Studies in Tachy-
hemia. New York: Speech Rehabilitation Institute,
1965.

Darley, Frederick. Diagnosis and Appraisal of Communica-
tion Disorders. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, 1964.

 

DeHirsch, Katrina, Jansky, Jeannette Jefferson and Langford,
William.B. Predictinngeading Failure: A Prelimin-
ary Study. New York: Harper and Row, 1966}

 

 

Edmonston, William. Laradon Articulation Scale Manual.
Beverly Hills, California: Western Psychological
Services, 1963.

 

Edwards, Allen L. Experimental Design in Psychological
Researph. New York, New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, 1953.

Fromm, Erika and Hartmann, Lenore. Intelligence, a Dynamic
Approach. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and
Company, Inc., 1955.

 

 

160

161

Kessler, Jane W. Psychopathology of Childhood. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966.

Matthews, Jack. "Speech Problems of the Mentally Retarded."
Handbook of Speech Pathology. Lee Edward Travis,
editor. New’York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.,

1957-

Milisen, Robert. "The Incidence of Speech Disorders."
Handbook of Speech Pathology. Lee Edward Travis,
editor. New York: Appleton-Century—Crofts, Inc.

1957-

Mussen, Paul H. The Psychological Development of the Child.
En lewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
19 3.

Powers, Margaret Hall. "Functional Disorders of Articula-
tion Symptomatology and Etiology." Handbook of
Speech Pathology. Lee Edward Travis, editor.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957.

 

 

 

 

. "Clinical and Educational Procedures in
Functional Disorders of Articulation." Handbook
of Speech Pathology. Lee Edward Travis, editor.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957.

 

Schreiber, Flora R. Your Child's Speech. New York:
G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1956.

 

Simon, Clarence T. "The Development of Speech." Hand-
book of Speech Pathology. Lee Edward Travis,
editor. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.,
1957-

Templin, Mildred. The Templin-Darley Tests of Articulation,
A Manual and Discussion of the Screening and
Diagnostic Tests. Iowa City, Iowa: Bureau of
Educational Research and Service Extension Division,
State University of Iowa, 1960.

 

Terman, Lewis M., and Merrill, Maud A. Measuring Intelli-
gence. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1937.

 

Van Riper, Charles. Speech Correction: Principles and
Methods. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1954.

 

Walker, Helen M. and Lev, Joseph. "Inferences Concerning
the Mean or the Difference between Two Means."
Statistical Inference. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, 1953.

 

I)

 

162

Wechsler, David. The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult
Intelligence. Baltimore, Maryland: The Williams
and Wilkins Company, 1958.

 

 

. WISC Manual: Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children. New York: The Psychological Corporation,
1949.

 

Weiss, D. A. "Logopedic Observations in a Mental Hospital."
Folia Phoniatrica, XVI, pp. 130-138 cited by Burk
and Saxman in Acoustic Analysis of Schizophrenic
Speech Behavior, M.H. grant 07112, Purdue University.
Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press,
December, 1965.

Wolpe, Zelda S. "Play Therapy, Psychodrama, and Parent
Counseling." Handbook of Speech Pathology. Lee
Edward Travis, editor. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts, Inc., 1957.

Wood, Kenneth Scott. "Terminology and Nomenclature." Hand-

book of Speech Pathology. Lee Edward Travis, editor.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957.

Public Documents

 

United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
Public Health Service. Research Profile, Summppy_
of Program in Hearing, Language and Speech Dis-
orders. Profile54, PHS Pub. No. 1156, Rev. 1965.

 

Articles and Periodicals

Altus, Grace T. "A WISC Profile for Retarded Readers,"
Journal of Consulting Psychology, XX, No. 2
(April, 19597. PD- 155-1554

American Speech and Hearing Association. "Federal Support
of the Profession of Speech and Hearing," ASHA,

VII, No. 5 (May, 1960), pp. 197-199.

American Speech and Hearing Association. "Institutional
News and Announcements," ASHA, VII, No. 11 (Novem-
ber, 1965), p. 480.

Andersland, Phyllis. "Maternal and Environmental Factors
Related to Success in Speech Improvement Training,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, IV, No. 4

(December, 1961), pp. 79-90.

 

 

163

Arnold, Genivieve. "The Illinois Test of Psycho—linguistic
Ability and Severe Articulatory Problems," ASHA,
v, No. 10 (October, 1966), p. 789.

Beck, H. H. and Lam, R. L. "The Use of the WISC in Pre-
dicting 0r anicity," Journal of Clinical Psychology,

Blatt, Sidney J., Allison, Joel, and Baker, Bruce L. "The
Wechsler Object Assembly Subtest and Bodily Con-

cerns," Journal of Consultin Ps cholo , XXIX,
No. 3 (June, 1965), pp. 223-250fi15""”“£fl;

Braen, Bernard and Masling, Joseph M. "Intelligence Tests
Used with Special Groups of Children," Exceppional

Children, XXVI, No. 1 (September, 1959), pp. 42-
48.

 

 

 

Burks, Harold F., and Bruce, Paul. "The Characteristics of
Poor and Good Readers as Disclosed by the WISC,"
Journal of Educational Psychology, XXXXVI, No. 8
(December, 1955): pp. 488-93.

Coleman, James C., and Sandu, Malathi. "Intellectual Level
and Background Factors in Learning Disorders,"
Psychological Reports, XVII,(August, 1965), pp. 69-
70.

Deal, Margaret. "A Summary of Research Concerning Patterns
of WISC Subtest Scores of Retarded Readers," Reading
Specialist, (May, 1965), pp. 101-11.

 

 

DeHirsh, Katrina, Jansky, Jeannette J., and Langford,
William S. "The Oral Language Performance of
Premature Children and Controls," Journal of Speech
and Hearing Disorders, XXIX, No. 1 (February, 1964),
pp. 60-69.

 

 

DiNello, Mario C. '"WISC Subtest Patterns as Predictors of
Reading Achievement of First Grade Boys," Disser-
tation Abstracts, XXVI, No. 10, p. 5862.

Dokecki, Paul R. "verbalism and the Blind: A Critical
Review of the Concept and the Literature," Exception—
pal Children, XXXII, No. 8 (April, 1966), pp. 525-32.

 

 

Everhart, Rodney W. "Literature Survey of Growth and Devel-
opmental Factors in Articulatory Maturation,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XXV, No. 1
(February, 1960), pp. 59-69.

164

. "The Relationship between Articulation and
Other Developmental Factors in Children," Journal
of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XVIII, No. 4
(December, 1953), pp. 332-38.

Field, J. G. "Two Types of Tables for Use with Wechsler
Intelligence Scales," Journal of Clinical Psycho-
logy, XVI, N0. 1 (January, 1960), pp. 3-7.

 

 

Flanary, Woodrow. "A Study of the Possible Use of the
Wechsler-Bellevue Scale in Diagnosis of Reading
Difficulties of Adolescent Youth," Dissertation
Abstracts, XIV, p. 1045.

 

 

Frank, G. H. "Empirical Critique of Research with the
Wechsler-Bellevue in Differential Psychodiagnosis,"
Journal of Clinical Psychology, XI, No. 3 (July,
.19557. 90- 291-93.

Fromm, Erika, Hartmann, Lenore and Marschak, Marian.
"Children's Intelligence Tests as a Measure of
Dynamic Personality Functioning," American Journal
of 0rthppsychiatry, XXVII, No. 1 (January, 1957),
pp 0 134-1+1;-

 

Furth, H. G., and Milgram, N. A. "Verbal Factors in Per-
formance on WISC Similarities," Journal of Clinical
Psychology, XXI, No. 4 (October, I965), pp. 424-47.

 

Gallagher, James J., and Lucito, Leonard J. "Intellectual
Patterns of Gifted, Compared with Average and Re-
tarded," Exceptional Children, XXVII, No. 9 (May,
1961), pp. 479-82.

Goldfarb, William, Braunstein, Patricia, and Lorge, Irving.
"Childhoos Schizophrenia Symposium, 1955: 5. A
Study of Speech Patterns in a Group of Schizophrenic
Children," Journal of Orthopsychiatry, XXVI, No. 3
(July. 19567. pp. 544-55.

Goodstein, Leonard. "Functional Speech Disorders and Per-
sonality: A Survey of Research," Journal of Speech
and HearinggDisorders, XXIII, No. 4 (December,
1958). pp. 359-75. .

. "Intellectual Impairment in Children with Cleft
Palates," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, IV,
No. 3 (September, 1961), pp. 287-94.

 

 

 

 

165

Graham, Ellis. "Wechsler-Bellevue and WISC Scattergrams
of Unsuccessful Readers," Journal of Consulting
Psychology, XVI, No. 4 (August, 1952), pp. 268L71.

Griffiths, J. S. "The Effect of Experimentally Induced
Anxiety on Certain Subtests of the Wechsler-
Bellevue," Dissertation Abstracts, XVIII, 1958,
pp. 655-6.

Guertin, W. H., Rabin, A., and Ladd, C. "Research with the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Adults: 1955-60,"
Psychological Bulletin, LIX, No. 1 (January, 1962),
pp. 1-25.

Hafner, A. J., Pollie, D. M. and Wapner, I. "The Relation-
ship between CMAS and WISC Functioning," Journal of

Clinical Ps cholo , XVI, No. 3 (July, 1960),
pp. 355-23-

Hammond, Keith, and Keitel, Hans G. "Childhood Academic
Undegacgievement," Medical Science, (December, 1964),
Pp- 2‘ 7. ‘

 

Henrickson, Ernest. "Psychological Aspects of the Develop-
ment of Speech and Language," Archives of Ph sical
Medicine Rehabilitation, XXXXI, No. 3(March, 1960;,
pp 0 95-102 0

Hill, C. "Problems Connected with Intelligence Assessment
of Children with Defective Speech," New Zealand
Speegh Therapists"r Journal, IX, (September, 1954),
pp. 7-10-

Hirst, Lynn Shellberg. "The Usefulness of a Two-Way
Analysis of WISC Sub-tests in the Diagnosis of
Remedial Reading Problems," Journal of Experimental
Education, XXIX, No. 2 (December, 1960), pp. 153460.

 

 

 

Hopkins, Kenneth D., and Michael, William B. "The Diagnostic
Use of WISC Subtest Patterns," California Journal of
Educational Research, XII, No. 3 (May, 1961), pp.
116-30 0

 

 

Jenkins, Edna and Lohr, Frances E. "Severe Articulation
Disorders and Motor Ability," Journal of Speech and
Hearing Disorders, XXIX, No. 3 (August, 19647, pp.
286‘” 92 o

 

Johnson, Wendell. "Are Speech Disorders 'Superficial' or
'Bgsic'?", ASHA, III, No. 8 (August, 1961), pp. 233-
23 .

 

O O
moi-”E
H
.
I 0
w
. 4.4 u
x
. .
1 .
o ‘ o
P
o .. n
I
\\
. I
l O
| I
v
.
O 1' O
‘.
l
l I .
I j .

 

 

 

166

Kass, Corrine. "Psycholinguistic Disabilities of Children
with Reading Problems," Exceptional Children,
XXXII, No. 8 (April, 1966), pp. 533-39.

Kronvall, Ernest L. and Diehl, Charles F. "The Relation-
ship of Auditory Discrimination to Articulation
Defects of Children with No Known Organic Impair-
ment," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XIX,
No. 3 (September, 1954), pp. 335-38.

Kronvall, Ernest L. "An Investigation of Some of the
Factors Frequently Suggested as Causes of
Functional Articulation Disorders," Dissertation
Abstracts, XXVI, No. 8, p. 4810.

 

Lerea, Louis. "Assessing Language Development," Journal of
Speech and Hearing Research, I, No. 1 (March, 1958),
pp. 75-85.

Lerea, Louis and Ward, Bruce. "Speech Avoidance Among
Children with Oral-Communication Defects," Journal
of Psychology, LX, 2nd Half (July, 1965), ppT‘EBEZ7o.

 

Lessing, E. E. and Lessing, J. C. "WISC Subtest Variabi-
lity and Validity of the WISC I. .," Journal of
Clinical Psychology, XIX, No. 1 January, 1963),

PP- 92-95.

Loper, Doris. "Auditory Discrimination, Intelligence,
Achievement and Background of Experience and
Information in a Culturally Disadvantaged First
Grade Population," Dissertation Abstracts, XXVI,
No. 10, pp. 5873.

Marge, Dorothy K. "The Social Status of Speech-Handicapped
Children," Journal of Speechland Hearinngesearch,
IX, No. 2 (June, 1966), pp. 165-78.

 

Masland, Mary Wooton, and Case, Linda W. "Limitation of
Auditory Memory as a Factor in Delayed Language
Development," Q§_Therapia Vocis et Loquelae, et
Phoniatriae, XIII, Congressus vendobonae Anno
MCMLXV Acta, I, No. 19, pp. 81-85.

 

Matarazzo, R. G. "The Relationship of Manifest Anxiety
to Wechsler-Bellevue Subtest Performance," Journal
of ConsultingPsychology, XIX, No. 3 (June, 1955},
p. 218. ‘

McCarthy, Dorothea. "Language Disorders and Parent-Child
Relationships," Journal of Speech and Hearing Dis-
orders, XXX, No.—4 (December, 1954), pp. 514-23.

 

0*?

 

 

,AI—(HHJ’.

. . .
.

. . l .

.

. v
o r
o
a I
u
I I
" o a n
..
i
/ o
u — I
O
n o o
... .
l
,
. O ( I
I
o
a 0 o
I I
7
l
- c
I -
v o

167

McLeod, J. "A Comparison of WISC Subtest Scores of
Pre-Adolescent Successful and Unsuccessful
Readers," Australian Journal of Psychology,
XVII, No. 3 (December, 1965), pp. 22-28.

McIntire, Matilda, Wiley, John and Wolski, William.
'Central Language Disorders as Seen in a Mental
Retardation Clinic," The Journal-Lancet, LXXXVI,
No. 7 (July, 1966), pp. 374-78.

Milisen, Robert, Herbert N. Wright, Katherine Snow, David
A. Scott, William R. Humphrey, Edward F. Romans,
and Donald B. Rice. "The Disorder of Articulation:
A Systematic Clinical and Experimental Approach,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, Monograph
Supplement No. 4, (December, 1954), pp. 5-18.

Mills, A. W. and Streit, H. "Report of a Speech Survey,
Holyoke Mass.," Journal of Speech Disorders, VII,
No. 2 (June, 1942), pp. 161-67.

 

Morrison, Sheila. "Measuring the Severity of Articulation
Defectiveness," Journal of Speech and Hearing
Disorders, XVII, No. 3 (September, 1952), pp. 263-68.

Mowrer, O. H. "Speech Development in the Young Child:
The Autism Theory of Speech Development and Some
Clinical Applications," Journal of Speech and
Hearing Disorders, XVII, No. 3 (September, 1952),
pp 0 263-680

 

 

Myklebust, Helmer. "Language Disorders in Children,"
Exceptional Children, XXII, No. 4 (January, 1956),
pp 0 163-66.

Nelson, 0. W. "An Investigation of Certain Factors Relat-
ing to the Nature of Children with Functional
Defects of Articulation," Journal of Educational
gegearch, XXXXVII, No. 3 (November, 1953), pp. 211-
l . .

 

Nichols, Alan C. "Allocation of Time in the Articulation
Program: Applications of Research," ASHA, VI, No. 1
(January, 1964), pp. 8-12.

Pendergast, Kathleen, Soder, Anton, Barker, Janet, Dickey,
Stanley, Gow, Jane, and Selmar, John. "An Articu-
lation Study of 15,255 Seattle First Grade Children
with and without Kindergarten," Exceptional Children,
XXXII, No. 8 (April, 1966), pp. 541-50.

 

168

Penn, Julia M. "Reading Disability: A Neurological
Deficit?" Exceptional Children, XXXVII, No. 4
(December, 1966), pp. 243-50. ,

 

Prins, T. David. "Motor and Auditory Abilities in Differ-
ent Groups of Children with Articulatory Deviations,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, V, No. 2
(June, 1962), pp. 161-68?

Ratner, Stanley, Garonski, John and Rice, Edward. "The
Variable of Concurrent Action in the Language of
Children-—Effect of DElayed Speech Feedback,"
Psychological Record, XIV, No. 1 (January, 1964),
pp. 47e56.

Reed, Homer B. C., Reitan, Ralph M., and Hallgrim, Kl¢ve.
'Influence of Cerebral Lesions on Psychological
Test Performance of Older Children," Journal of
Consulting Psyghology, XXXX, No. 3 (June, 19657,
pp. 247-51.

Rowley, V. N. "Analysis of the WISC Performance of Brain-
Damaged and Emotionally Disturbed Children,"
Journal of Consultinngsychology, XXV, No. 6
(Becember, 1961), p. 553.

 

Sandy, Don. "Auditory Discrimination and Articulation‘
Proficiency of Kindergarten Children," Dissertation
Abstracts, XXVI, No. 8, p. 4891. .

 

 

Saunders, David A. "A Factor Analysis of the Picture
Completion Items of the WAIS," Journal of Clinical

Psychology, XVI, No. 2 (April, 1966), pp. 146449.

Sawyer, Rita. "A Study of Discrimination by the Subtests of
the WISC Between Mildly Disabled and Severely Dis-
abled Readers Diagnosed at the Syracuse Reading
Center, September, 1958, to June, 1963," Disserta—
tion Abstracts, XXVI, No. 5, p. 2594.

 

Schneiderman, Norma. "A Study of the Relationship between
Articulatory Ability and Language Ability," Journal
of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XX, No. 4 (Decem-
ber, 1965). pp. 359-64.

Seashore, Harold, Wesman, Alexander and Doppelt, Jerome.
'The Standardization of the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for Children," Journal of Consulting Psycho—
1ogy, XIV, No. 2 (April, 1950), pp. 99-110.

 

 

 

169

.Shinagawa, FuJiro. "A Statistical Study of Discrepancy

between Verbal I.Q. and Performance I.Q. on the
WISC " Japanese Journal of Child Psychiatry, I.,
pp. 403-11, cited in Psychological Abstracts,
XXXVI, No. 2 (April, 1962), p. 321.

 

. "Studies of the Relationship between Intelligence
Structure and Personality Traits: An Analysis of
WISC Discrepancy," Japanese Psyphological Research,

V, No. 2, pp. 55-62, cited in Psychological Abstracts,
XXXVIII, No. 4 (August, 1964), p.765l.

 

Solomon, Arthur L. "Emotional and Behavior Problems of
First Grade School Children with Functional Defects
of Argiculation," ASHA, II, No. 10 (October, 1960),
p. 37 .

. "Personality and Behavior Patterns of Children
with Functional Defects of Articulation," Child
Development, XXXII, No. 4 (December, 1961), pp. 731-
737-

Sommers, Ronald K., Cockerille, Clara E., Paul, Clara D.,
Bowser, Dolores C., Fichter, George R.,Fenton, Ann
K., and Copetas, Florence G. "Effects of Speech
Therapy and Speech Improvement upon Articulation
and Reading," Journal of Speech and Hearinngis-
orders, XXVI, No. 1, (February, 1961), pp. 27-38.

 

Spreistersbach, Duane C. "Research in Articulation Dis-
orders and Personality," Journal of Speech and
HearingiDisorders, XXI, No. 3 (September, 1956),
pp ‘ 329-35 0

Templin, Mildred. "A Study of Aggressiveness in Normal and
Defective Speaking College Students," Journal of
Speech Disorders, III, No. 1 (March, 1938), pp. 43-49.

 

. "Norms on 8 Screening Test of Articulation for
Ages Three Through Eight," Journal of Speech and

Hearin Disorders, XVIII, No. 4 (December, 19537,
pp.—32 -31.

Tjossen, T. D., Hansen, T. J., and Ripley, H. J. "An
Investigation of Reading Difficulty in Young Child-
ren," American Journal of Psyphiatry, CXVIII, No. 12,
(June, 1962), pp. 1104-13.

 

170

Trapp, E. Phillip and Evans, Janet. "Functional Articula-
tory Defects and Performance on a Nonverbal Task,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, XXV, No.
27(May, 1960), pp. 176180.

Vandemark, Ann Ahlstrand and Mann, Mary Bachmann. "Oral
Language Skills of Children with Defective Articu-
1ation," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research,
VII, No. 4'(December, 1965), pp. 409-15.

Villarreal, Jesse, Schiefelbush. Pronovost, Wilbert, and
Milisen, Robert. "I. Report of the Subcommittee
on Articulation Problems," Journal of Speech and
Hearing Disorders Monograph: Research Needs in
Speech Patholo and Audiology, Supplement V
(September, 1959 , pp. 14-17.

Wait, Mary E. "Language Development, Anxiety and Early
Socialization Processes," Dissertation Abstracts,
XXVI, N00 9, p0 5255.

Weaver, Carl H., Furbee, Catherine, and Everhart, Rodney W.
"Paternal Occupational Class and Articulation
Defects in Children," Journal of Speech and Hearing
Disorders, XXV, No. 2 (May, 1960), pp. 171-75.

. "Articulatory Competency and Reading Readiness,"
Journal of Speech and Hearinngesearch, III, No. 3,
(June, 19607, pp. 174-80.

 

Wickelgren, Wayne A. "Short- Term Memory for Repeated and
Non-Repeated Items," anrterlyTJournal of Experi-
mental Psychology, XVII, Part 1(February, 19657,
pp. 14-25.

Winitz, Harris and Lawrence, Martha. "Children's Articula-
tion and Sound Learning Ability," Journal oflSpeech
and Hearing Research, IV, No. 3 (September, 19617,
pp. 259-68.

Wood, Kenneth Scott. "Parental MaladJustment and Functional
Articulatory Disorders in Children," Journal of
Speech Disorders, XI, No. 1 (September, 1945),
PD- 255- 75.

Yedinack, J. G. "A Study of Linguistic Functioning of
Children with Articulation and Reading Disabilities,"
Journal of Genetic Ps chology, LXXIV, lst Half,
(March, 1949), pp. 2 ~59.

171

Unpublished Material

 

Allen, Evelyn Y. "A Speech and Language Development
Program for Children in Operation Head Start."
Paper read before the American Speech and Hearing
Association Annual Convention, Washington, D. C.,
November 12, 1966, pp. 1-10. (Dittoed).

Arnold, Godfrey E. "The LLMM Theory of Language Dis—
ability," Paper Read before the Northern Section
of the California Speech and Hearing Association,
San Francisco, California, April 4, 1964.
(Dittoed.)

Butler, Katharine. "Self-Concept as a Psychological
Correlate to the Development of Oral Language
Skills." Paper read before the American Speech and
Hearing Association Annual Convention, San Francisco,
California, November 21, 1964, pp. 1-8. (Mimeo-
graphed.)

. "Psychological Correlates of Speech Defects as
Revealed Through Projective Techniques." Paper read
before the American Speech and Hearing Assoiciation
Annual Convention, Chicago, Illinois, November 1,
1965, pp. 1-5. (Mimeographed.)

 

. "Indicators of Emotional Disturbance in School-
Age Children with Articulation and Delayed Speech
Problems." Paper read before the American Speech

and Hearing Association Annual Convention, Washington,
C. D., November 20, 1966, pp. 1-3. (Mimeographed.)

 

Deming, B. A. "A Study of the Emotional Adjustment of
Fanctional Articulation Cases as Indicated by the
Bender-Gestalt TeSt." Unpublished Master's Thesis,
Department of Speech, University of Oklahoma, 1952.

D011, Edgar A. "Education and the Interjacent Child."
Paper read before a Vanguard School audience at
Roberts Hall, Haverford College, Haverford, Penn-
sylvania, January 30, 1965. (Offset.)

Green, AntJe E. "Speech of Psychiatric Patients: A Hospital
Survey." Unpublished Master's Thesis, Purdue
University, 1962.

Greenberg, K. R. "A Study of the Relationship between Articu-
latory Disorders and Personality in the Intermediate
Grades." Unpublished Master's Thesis, Department of

Speech, Ohio State University, 1952.

 

 

 

 

172

Irwin, Ruth Becky. "A Study of Certain Linguistic Skills
of Children in Project Head Start of the South-
Western School District," Paper read before the
American Speech and Hearing Association Annual
Convention, Washington, D. C., November 12, 1966.
(Mimeographed.)

McPherson, Marion. "The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children." Unpublished lecture at Western Michigan
University, Kalmazoo, Michigan, November 10, 1960.
(Typewritten.)

Spraings, Violet. "Implications of Psychologic Testing for
the Detection and Education of Neurologically
Handicapped Children," Paper read before the
Seminar on Expanding Horizons for the Neurologic-
ally Handicapped Child, San Francisco, California,
October 31, 1963, pp. 1-9. (Offset.)

Young, Norton B. "Phonetic Limits of Word Reocgnition in
Children." Paper read before the American Speech
and Hearing Association Annual Convention, Washing-
ton, D. C., November 13, 1966, pp. 1-10. (Type-
written.)

Other Sources

 

. Personal letter from Harold L. Luper, Ph. D.,
Head of the Department of Audiology and Speech
Pathology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville,
Tennessee, December 8, 1966.

 

APPENDIX A

SUMMARY TABLE OF WISC SCORES
FOR EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

174

SUMMARY TABLE OF THE WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR CHILDREN SCORES
FOR THE ARTICULATORY-DEFECTIVE CHILDREN IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case Verbal Subtests Perf. Subtests: 8 .2
C as
Num— C H) H E g
Age . ber . I; p ,3 - x60 >. s: to - p - -
86 8 2 3 a ‘3 115 .32 .31: 8"; at. a 2" 80’ :0”
Sexaaaasaaaamssaaasagusa
1-M 8 9 9 11 7 10 11 11 8 8 8 94 94 93
2-F 9 3 12 9 3 10 14 6 13 6 6 5 93 88
3-F 6 8 10 6 7 11 13 11 8 - 84 106 93
6—0 4-M 13 9 14 8 4 - 15 12 14 12 10 97 118 108
5-M 9 15 6 4 16 6 17 10 5 12 10 96 106 101
to 6-M 10 13 8 12 6 6 l4 9 11 12 7 95 104 99
7—F 10 11 9 11 9 14 9 14 8 11 104 97 101
7—0 8-M 15 12 11 10 7 1 12 18 13 14 13 110 128 120
9-M 1g 16 11 12 14 10 14 16 17 14 18 119 129 126
lO-F 13 9 12 9 9 10 91 90 90
ll-M 11 10 13 11 10 11 11 12 8 10 8 106 99 103
l2-M 14 10 16 11 9 13 13 9 16 9 109 114 112
13-F 11 6 10 6 7 - 7 11 13 12 7 87 100 93
14-F 7 6 11 6 5 14 14 - 12 15 12 89 122 105
15-M 9 11 10 13 10 9 11 9 12 9 10 103 101 102
l6-F g 10 10 a 8 l1 6 g 6 8 12 2 5 8
8—0 17-M 10 9 13 8 5 9 2 4
l8-M 6 11 11 8 11 - 13 12 15 11 15 96 122 109
to l9—M 7 11 10 6 8 8 9 11 12 13 90 106 97
20-M 7 10 8 11 1o 13 8 8 10 7 14 99 96 97
9-0 21-M 13 11 12 10 13 12 14 11 14 12 10 111 115 115
22-F 10 12 8 9 11 8 8 11 9 8 97 93 95
23-M 8 12 12 8 6 12 11 8 9 11 11 97 100 99
24-F 10 11 12 16 6 11 11 10 13 5 10 106 99 103
25-F 10 6 10 lo 10 11 12 12 10 8 9 97 101 99
26—F 5 10 8 9 6 4 6 10 9 8 11 81 92 85
27-M 12 9 7 6 9 7 10 5 90 86 87
8 28—F 7 11 6 12 7 - 10 ll 8 11 10 91 100 95
‘0 29-F 7 8 8 8 9 13 10 11 12 13 92 106 99
t 30—F ; 10 6 8 8 14 13 10 11 15 92 110 101
0 31-M 13 11 9 10 7 11 9 10 9 97 97 97
32—11 5 6 ,5 7 9 9 7 9 10 9 10 80 93 85
9-0 3 —M g 10 9 10 11 7 l3 l3 8 4 94 94 93
3 -M 10 7 14 ll 13 12 9 7 12 10 104 100 102
35—M 10 13 12 16 13 7 14 14 11 15 - 111 125 120
36—M 5 10 5 9 7 6 9 7 5 5 12 81 83 80
9—0 37-M 11 9 10 14 7 6 10 13 13 15 13 97 120 109
38-M 12 13 10 14 11 12 14 12 12 11 8 113 110 112
t0 39-M 6 7 8 9 10 6 11 7 10 10 9 85 96 89
40-M 7 9 5 8 7 5 14 7 7 8 8 80 92 84
10—0 41-M 6 6 6 10 7 6 Z a 7 9 12 80 90 8
42—M 9 11 7 12 9 6 1 10 13 6 94 99 9
43-M 6 7 9 6 5 8 10 9 11 9 9 80 97 87
10-0 44-M 6 4 11 12 8 11 9 8 10 15 11 l 104 9
to 45—M 7 5 7 10 5 12 10 8 9 10 11 5 97 9
11-0 46-M 5 10 10 7 g 6 9 11 8 7 4 85 8 83
47-11 9 7 13 9 8 13 13 8 12 7 95 10 99
11-0 48—M 6 9 7 7 9 - 7 7 8 7 8 85 82 82
to 49-M 4 g 8 10 g - 11 10 9 g 11 80 100 88
12—0 50-M 10 12 11 1 8 15 10 13 1 15 103 124 114

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX.B

SUMMARY TABLES OF MEAN VERBAL AND PERFORMANCE
SUBSCALE SCORES AND S.D.‘S FOR ALL SUBJECTS
BY AGE GROUPS

176

.05036 m>ap
105302 0:» mpcmmmpaoa m 0:030 «0:036 m>3uommon 300000 on» mpcmmmaomh d nachos

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.33 3.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.03 0.0 0.03 0.0 0.0 0 0-0
, on

0.0 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.03 0.0 0.0 033 0.03 0.3 0.» 0 0-0

0.03 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.03 0.0 0.03 0.0 0.03 m 0-0
on

3.0 00.03 0.0 0.03 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.03 0.3 3.03 0.0 3.0 0 0-0

0.03 00.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.03 0.0 0.03 0.0 0.03 0 0-0
on

0.0 30.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.03 3.0 3.03 0.0 0.03 0 0-0
0.0 082 .00 :00: .90 :00: 33.0 one: 0.0 0002 0.0 one: 0.0 000: w W
m 0

03000950 .0 .Q .oo> .830 .np3h¢ .0800 .omcH *
3nbpm> abnoonsm 3mnpo>_
IIIILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII|||||

 

 

 

mmbomc m¢< Mm wmqmzdm M>Hedzmoz 924 m>HBomme Mummmm Mme 2H
maomwmbm AQ¢ mom m..m.m 924 mmmoom mq¢owmbm Q<mmm> Z¢m2 mo Mm<ZEDm

 

 

 

 

177

.03030 0>30
105302 0:» 0020003003 m 0:030 «0:030 0>3000m0n £00000 0n» 0030003003 0 05030*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:.NH 3.0m m.m 0.03 m.m 0.0H m.m 0.03 m.m o.oH N.m N.oH o.m m.m m omma
b.» m.H: 0&0 o.m m.m o.m m.H m.m N.m o.m m. o.m :.N 0.0 < OIHH
w.ma m.om m.m 0.03 H.m H.03 o.m 0.0H H.m N.oH H.m H.0H m.m m.m m omwa
m.: w.mm m.m o.m ®.H w.© H.N m.® o.N 0.0H H.N 0.0 :.H 0.0 4 ouoa
m.HH 0.0m m.w m.m m.m 0.0H o.m 0.0H o.m H.0H w.m H.OH m.m m.m m ome
H.m o.m: m.m 0.0 ®.H m.m ©.m m.OH m.a m.b H.m m.m N.N o.m ¢ 01m
83.0 :00: .30 :00: .90 000: 33.0 :00: .30 :00: .90 :00: .3320~ 000: mac W
m m
.0 .0 .8> .230 .0330 .250 .803 ...
03000930
30930> 09009950 H0n30>
E.II.IIIIll-IIIJIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.IllIllillll.l|lu|ll..|||l

 

meomwmbm Had mom m..Q.m Qz< mmmoom mq¢ommbm A¢mmm> Z¢m2 m0 Mm¢SZDw

 

('1

 

 

 

 

 

 

ill

mmbomc mw< wm mmqm£<m m>H802mOz Qz< N>Heommmm NOMMmm was 2H

.05030 0>30083oz 09»
0000003003 M 03030 «00030 0>3900009 900000 099 0900003003 0 050300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.0H H.0m H.m 0.0H m.m m.m o.m H.0H m.N 0.0H m.N H.0H m 01m
. 09
0.0 m.om «.0 0.03 m.m 0.0 m. 0.0 0.0 0.03 0.0 «.03 ¢ 010
m.m m.om H.m H.0H o.m m.m m.m H.0H m.m H.0H m.m 0.0H m 01w
0»
o.w m.om ©.N m.oH o.m m.m m.m ©.OH m.H ©.m ©.N m.OH 4 01b
m.m 0.0m m.m H.0H H.m 0.0H b.m 0.0H m.m m.m m.m 0.0H m 01h
op
m.m m.:m :.H o.m m.m m.OH :.m m.OH m.m m.HH o.m O.NH < 010
.D.m €002 .Q.m 3300—: .Q.m £002 .Q.m 3.300: .Q.m c002 .Q.m 0502 % 0W
0 m
.0
.COO .¢.O .Q.m .d.m .o.m *
03000
00008300300 09009930 00003300300

 

 

 

mmbomu mc< Mm mqm£<m mPHedszz 924 m>HBOMmMQ mommmm NEE 2H
mBthmDm AA¢ mom m..m.m Qz< mmmOom ma¢ommbm moz<EmONMMm z<m2 mo Hmdzzbm

179

.03030

0> 905305 099
0900003003 0 03030 “03030 0>3900300 900000 029 0930003 03 0 030300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.33 0.0: 3.m 0.0 0.m 0.03 3.m m.m 3.m 0.03 m.m 3.03 m 01m3
09
0.33 0.3m 0.m m.33 9.3 0.03 3.m 0.03 9.3 0.0 m.m 0.33 ¢ 0133
m.03 0.0m 3.m 0.03 0.0 0.03 0.m 3.03 3.m 0.0 0.m 0.03 m 0133
09
3.m «.0: ®.m :.m h.m 0.03 m.3 «.0 0.3 m.m m.3 N.03 d 0103
m.33 0.0m 0.0 0.03 0.m 3.03 m.m 0.03 0.m 0.0 0.m 0.0 m 0103
09
m.m 0.00 m.m 0.0 N.m 3.03 ®.N 3.0, m.m 0.0 0.0 0.33 3 Cum
. Q. m. Cams 5. m. €002 . Q. m .9002 .Q. m Cam: .9. m. Cam: .Q. m Emmi.
9 V
J 3
o o o o o o o o o m %
03000 000 4 0 Q m < m 0 n3 3......
00005303300 09009930 00305303300
llfillllllllllllllllllrLll

 

mmbomc m0¢ Mm quzdm m>HB¢£mOz 924 MPHaommwQ mOMMmm mus zH
WHOMhmDm 33¢ mom m..m.m 92¢ mmmoom m3<ommbm MUZ¢2mommMm Z¢MS mo Mmdzzbm

APPENDIX C

SUMMARY TABLE OF INDIVIDUAL VERBAL AND PERFORMANCE
I.Q. SCALE SCORES -— DIRECTIONALITY 0F MEANS

 

 

 

.HH> mfiflwfi CH 03w wwofiflhmkhfig Cam: CS“ wmQOOm ohhmm CG“ Hwnhw> pr09 "@802

 

181

 

 

 

30 303 m03 om ; 3 303 30 mm
00 003 00 m: 3 mm 003 30
m 00 mm 03 m 003 30 mm
m 303 mm 33 3 mm 30 mm
0 mm mm 03 : m33 333 30
03 30 mm m: m 00 mm 00
M3 {303 30 33 03 003 00 03
33 30 00 m: 00 003 00 03
m 00 30 m: 3 mm 00 33
03 00 00 33 3 mm mm 03
03 mm 00 03 0 303 m03 m3
33 00 mm mm mm 003 00 33
m 033 m33 0m m 003 30 m3
mm 003 3m 3m 0 333 003 m3
0 mm 30 mm m m03 003 33
:3 003 333 mm 3 00 30 03
a 003 303 :m 03 003 033 m
0 :0 :0 mm 03 003 033 0
M3 mm 00 mm 3 30 303 3
0 30 3m 3m 0 303 mm 0
03 033 mm om 03 003 00 m
:3 003 mm mm 30 033 30 0
m 003 30 00 mm 003 30 m
3 00 00 30 0 mm mm m
0 mm 30 00 0 am :0 3
0a> 0y> 0A> .0.3 .0.3 0000 0n> 0y> mn> .0.3 .0.3 0000
.830330m Hmnhm> .EhOhhmm Hmnhm>

 

3

mbomc 3.333.232.3ng 333.3. mom 910.3
mozflzmommmm 32¢ 333mg; .330 EH3<ZOH80m3mHQ .330 "33333.3. Mmgbm

APPENDIX D

RANKING OF THE WISC SUBTEST SCORES BY DEVIATION
FROM AVERAGE TEST AGE SCORES FOR THE SIX AGE
GROUPS, EXPERIMENTAI.SAMPLE

 

Hunt

‘2. _

 

 

 

183

 

 

 

.008 3.033u.3300 3.008 0.303n.30> "09:0 .008 3.033 n.3300 T008 0.30 n.30> 333:0
.008 0.00n.0300 3.008 0.00n.30> u¢ezn .008 m.m0u.0300 0008 0.33 I30> “38:0

03: 0000 93030 .33 0 n 003000 00030 .33
0 n 003000 30030 .03 3 - 0390809334 .03
m n 003000 .0 3 - 00390830303 .0
m - 0300000333 .0 00-03 m - 003000 .0 00-0
m - 00390830303 .3 m - 0000 93030 .3
3 - .33¢ .9030 .0 09 o 030309000> .0 09
0 330309000> .m 0 .0800 .9030 .m
m + 33080000 .090 .3 0-0 3 + 03980000 900390 .3 0:0
3 + 0030000030800 .m m + 003933033830 .0
03+ .0800 .9030 .0 3 + .33¢ .9030 .0
03+ 0039330333830 .3 m + 0030000030800 .3
0 n .330 .9030 .33 0 n 003000 .33
m - 3303090000 .03 0 n 003933033830 .03
m - 33000003 .300 .0 m - 330300000> .0
3 - 003930033030 .m 00-0 3 - 33050003 000300 .m 00-3
3 - 00390830303 . o 0000 93030 .
3 - 0000 93030 .0 09 0 039080933¢ .0 09
0 .0800 .9030 .m 0 .0800 .9030 .m
m + 003000 30030 .3 0-3 m + 00390830303 .3 0:0
3 + 0030000030800 .0 m + 003000 #0033 .m
3 + 0390809330 .0 0 + 0030000030800 .0
0 + 003000 .3 0 + .330 .9030 .3

009002 30 03000 0000 000 00900: 30 03000 300m 000

30909 .>3 8030 .>00 9009000 30908 .>< 8030 .>00 9009000

 

m30z¢0 3¢Bzm£Hmm0NM 0000000 30¢ KHm mmB mom 030000 30¢ Emma
mu¢mm>¢ 20mm ZOHB¢H>33 N3 030000 8038390 00H3 mma mo OZHMZ¢K

184

 

 

 

 

 

.008 m.mm3n.330m 3.008 0.0m3u.30> 3<ez3 .008 3.3m3n.3300 3.008 0.303u.30> 30020
00- 0000 93030 .33 03- 0030000030000 .33
om- 00390830303 .03 m3- 003000 .03
33- .33< .9033 .m m - 00390830303 .0
m - 0030000030800 .W 30-03 3 - 330300000> .m 00:33
3 - 0390009330 . 3 - 003000 00030 .3
3 - 003000 00030 .0 09 3 - .330 .9033 .0 09
0 33000003 .300 .0 m + 0000 93030 .0
0 330300000> .3 0-33 m + 003933033830 .3 0-03
m + 003933033030 .0 0 + .0000 .9030 .m
0 + .0000 .9030 .0 03+ 33000000 .390 .0
.03+ 003000 .3 00+ 0390809330 .3

00900: 30 03000 0000 00¢ 009002 30 03000 0000 . 000
30909 .30 8033 .>00 9009000 30909 .30 8033 .300 9009080

'l" 'll‘ll' itiii'iiil‘l’

m00z¢m 0<Bzmszmem .mmbomo mu¢ NHm mma mom mmmoom Mc< Emma
mo<mm>< 20mm ZOHB¢H>M0 Mm wmmoom Emmembm omH3 fire 00 wZHMz<m

30000390003

 

 

 

APPENDIX E

TEST AGE EQUIVALENTS ON SUBTESTS OF THE
WISC BY MONTHS FOR DEFECTIVE SPEAKERS

186

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmmx<mmm MbHflomme mom

mmBzoz Mm omHz mmB mo mammembm zo mBZMQ¢>HDGm mo< Emma

A A #
om :HH :mH ooH mmfl mad moH :oH om E moH mm moa Hod Hm A
mmH mm mm m» mm mm oHH mm om :m mm 0» mm om o-m
mmH oHH om ooH om HoH m» om mm :m mm m» mm ma
:ma ooH mma mm :HH NHH an :m op am mm on mm ma op
mm mm m» we moH mu on mm mm mm om mp p» H
00H :5 mm on mm m» mu am mm mm mm mu m» ma 0.»
mm om ooH mp om mm m» mm mm mm om m» mm ma
oofi mmfi :OH I: oma oHH mad mm mm mm mm on :5 :H
:mm spofi opofi omHfi omHH mmoa o:m omm mmm mmm whoa mzoa mmofi..poa
0» aw mm mm mm m» In mm mm mm mm mm mm ma
m» mma mu mm mod ooH on o» om moa mm moH om ma
a» mm mm am om om om :m om :m mm mm om Ha
on om mm :5 o» H» mm om mm 0» mm o» :5 ca
m» oHH mza :HH :HH mHH m» «OH om gm :HH moH mm m o-~
ooH :HH moH me om moH oHH mm m» mm om moH mm m
zm mm 0» mm mm m» mHH on mm on mm mu mm 5
mm mm :5 op mp :5 mm mm mm mm om c» on m o»
z» mm mm mm mzfi mm mm moH mm mm mm o» m» m
:5 mm moH :m :HH Hm nu mm mm :m mm em N» z
.I mm 2. mm mm E. mm mm mm i mm mm mm m 0.0
mm mm :m mm mm mu on mm me :u mm on 50 m
mm mm mm m» mm mm mm mm mm mm 0» mm mm H
w wm mm mm mm. Wm «m M m m w m. 3 mm mm
0.. Sn... 80 J0; m0 as 83 O m .L. m J as mo. 08
Tk rue 7&0 . 1. Aunq 1. u.& E . 4+ .0 0 4+ OK; n
u . 0 WM. n . n ...... O. U. . . 89 d.
S o, J a . . do 8
3 a a...
mocmspompmm awnam>
fl lIIIIIJIrIIIIllIHIIIIIII

187

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmm mmm omm mmoH 3mm Hmm mmm omm mom on mom :mp mpm .uoe

nu «ma omH mam mmH :ma mp «NH mmH :HH mmH ooH mHH mm

mom omH mp mm :HH HoH :mH moH mmH mm mm mm pod mm

mm mm mm mma mmH :oH mp mam om moH mom mm mm mm oum

mm mm moH mm mp mm om no op op mp op mp mm

mm mm mm mm moH mm mp mm om moH :HH mp mm am on

omH nHH moH mma om :HH opH om mm mm mm mm moH om

:HH mma :HH moH om mom omH mm mm mm om mm mm mm oum

mm :HH mm «NH :HH poH .1 mp mmH mm mom mm mm mm

mm mm mm mp om am mp om mm mm om mom mm pm

mmmH mafia mmma mmoa momH zomH mpoa :Hoa mmoH mama mmHH mmoa omofl. .poa

no op mp mm :p om mm mm mp op mm mm mm mm

mp op. mm mm om :m om mm mm mm mm mm om mm o-m

mm mm :HH :m om mm om mm mmH mm om mm mm mm 0»

mm moa mm mm moH mm mHH mm op mom mop mm- om mm -p

mm mp mm oofl mp mm mp- map mm. mm moH mm, Hm mm o

m mm mm mm mm Wm mm m. m m m .m mm mm. mm

P So} Snu Tao may «as 913 O m .L m .J an: m.H o.a

Tr pus 7&0 . 1. .an+ 1. u.& a . 1. d o “4 05} n

U . 0 W]. n . n n+ q U. . . 38 d

3 1. J J . . JO 8
9 a a...

mocpromgmm Hmnhm>

 

 

mmmx¢Mmm m>H90mmMQ

mom

mmezoz Mm omH3 mme m0 mammambm zo mezmA¢>HD®m mu< BmMB

 

 

 

u

 

 

HmpoB

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

188

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

«NNH mNHm 3mm: ommm mHmm mmmm ommm «mm: Hmmm omm: mom: om.z momma
om: mHH mHH mpm mm: mpm N omm opm mmm mHm mpm .poe
ooH ooH omH mmH omH mmH omH :mH HHH :mH mmH om o-«H
«HH mNH HNH mmH «:H om mmH mHH moH «m moH m: on
mHH NoH «HH ooH «oH «NH NoH «oH mNH «oH pmH m: ouHH
ram omw «mm 0:0 m:m oom mom 0mm «0: :m: pmm .uos
:oH mmH moH :pH mmH :«H :HH mmH mm mHH pHH p:
moH mNH :HH :oH mNH moH om mNH mNH mm «oH m: o-HH
mop mNH :HH moH mNH Nm mNH NoH mp NoH oHH m: on
:mH omH mNH :oH :HH oHH omH mmH «m :m mHH a: onoH
mHH mHH omH :HH mNH mp «m :HH mm mm mm m:
:pp #:m mzp oom :pm mop mam 0mm mmp 0mm mop .909
«m NoH mm moH mp om :HH mm «m mp mm «H
NmH mmH :HH ooH mmH oHH mmH mm mNH moH poH H: o-oH
mm mm mm «m mmH om om Nm moH mm mm oz
moH mHH :HH No mNH mHH NoH «oH om mmp mm mm on
mo mNH oHH mmH mmH «NH omH :HH NHH mNH HmH mm
«mH NmH mmH «mH :HH om omH HHH moH mHH moH pm oum
mHH mm «m «m NoH om NoH «m moH mp mm_ mm
0 V0 Him Vd 9d A cu V nu I VL NS V
m. m m m m. m m. mu m m. m m m. m m mm. mm
m. wuw Trm. . m..1mM w. . 1. .d 0 0+ 05} n
Ha n+ .w J a . m. . . an“ .M

a a Q

mOCmBeHOhhwm Hmflhm>

 

 

 

 

 

mmmxamm m>HBommmm mom mmezoz Mm omH3 MPH. m0 memmEumSm 20 mezmq<>HD®m mad Emma.

 

 

 

"an
N“
All!
m"