Vanderbilt Clinical Trials

Retrieval Practice for Word Learning for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children

Purpose

This study is designed to advance the promising yet underutilized research on retrieval practice by evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of two key retrieval practice features (feedback and spacing). The study uses four single case adapted alternating treatments studies, each with four 5- to 8-year-old children who are deaf and hard of hearing to evaluate the effects of feedback and spacing on the efficiency of word learning and retention.

Conditions

Hearing Loss
Language Impairment

Eligibility

Eligible Ages: Between 5 Years and 8 Years
Eligible Genders: All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Inclusion Criteria

At least minimal prelingual hearing loss - Standard scores of at least 70 for receptive and expressive vocabulary skills - English is only spoken language

Exclusion Criteria

Below average nonverbal cognition - Uncorrected vision impairment - Evidence of severe motor impairment

Study Design

Phase: N/A
Study Type: Interventional
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Intervention Model Description: Adapted alternating treatments research design with 3 conditions per participant. Four participants are randomly assigned to each contrast (arm).
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Masking: None (Open Label)

Arm Groups

Arm	Description	Assigned Intervention
Experimental Contrast A	Feedback vs no feedback with massed trials	Behavioral: Feedback with massed trials The participant receives feedback on their accuracy completing retrieval practice tasks. Exposures for one word are provided before moving to the next word in each session. Behavioral: No feedback with massed trials The participant does not receive feedback on their accuracy completing retrieval practice tasks. Exposures for one word are provided before moving to the next word in each session. Behavioral: No teaching control The words in this set are not taught, only assessed.
Experimental Contrast B	Feedback vs no feedback with spaced trials	Behavioral: Feedback with spaced trials The participant receives feedback on their accuracy completing retrieval practice tasks. Exposures for each word are interspersed with one another (e.g., an exposure for word 1, then one for word 3, then one for word 2, etc.) in each session. Behavioral: No feedback with spaced trials The participant does not receive feedback on their accuracy completing retrieval practice tasks. Exposures for each word are interspersed with one another (e.g., an exposure for word 1, then one for word 3, then one for word 2, etc.) in each session. Behavioral: No teaching control The words in this set are not taught, only assessed.
Experimental Contrast C	Spaced vs massed trials without feedback	Behavioral: No feedback with massed trials The participant does not receive feedback on their accuracy completing retrieval practice tasks. Exposures for one word are provided before moving to the next word in each session. Behavioral: No feedback with spaced trials The participant does not receive feedback on their accuracy completing retrieval practice tasks. Exposures for each word are interspersed with one another (e.g., an exposure for word 1, then one for word 3, then one for word 2, etc.) in each session. Behavioral: No teaching control The words in this set are not taught, only assessed.
Experimental Contrast D	Spaced vs massed trials with feedback	Behavioral: Feedback with massed trials The participant receives feedback on their accuracy completing retrieval practice tasks. Exposures for one word are provided before moving to the next word in each session. Behavioral: Feedback with spaced trials The participant receives feedback on their accuracy completing retrieval practice tasks. Exposures for each word are interspersed with one another (e.g., an exposure for word 1, then one for word 3, then one for word 2, etc.) in each session. Behavioral: No teaching control The words in this set are not taught, only assessed.

Recruiting Locations

Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Nashville, Tennessee 37232

Contact:
Jena McDaniel, PhD

More Details

Status: Recruiting
Sponsor: Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Study Contact

Jena C McDaniel, PhD
615-936-5114
jena.mcdaniel@vumc.org

Detailed Description

The proposed research addresses a long-standing and important challenge of improving language skills of children who are deaf and hard of hearing, a historically under researched group. The study aims to leverage retrieval practice - an empirically validated intervention approach - for improving how efficiently children who are deaf and hard of hearing learn and retain new words. To advance the promising yet underutilized research on retrieval practice, the study completes the next logical step of evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of two key retrieval practice features: feedback and spacing. Feedback is predicted to result in more efficient learning because it focuses attention on unmastered material, prevents the illusion of success, and reduces repeated errors. Spacing trials are predicted to result in more efficient learning than massed trials because they require more effort with fewer cues provided. The study will accomplish these aims through four single case adapted alternating treatments design studies with sixteen 5- to 8- year-old children who are deaf and hard of hearing. Study innovations include the critical evaluation of retention and use of a multi-session intervention context. The knowledge gained will guide language intervention for children who are deaf and hard of hearing.