criteria of comparison

[Lynne Hewitt]

An important methodological problem in child language research dealing with
specific language impairment is matching to appropriate reference
groups.  While so-called "language-matching" has been preferred in the
literature (usually accomplished in English via MLU and a formal language
test of some sort), there are arguments in favor of age matching.  A clear
problem with MLU-matched samples is that they are matched on one aspect of
language only.  Using MLU in this way institutionalizes, albeit in hidden
form, the notion that MLU is a direct probe of total language
ability.   This notion is highly questionable, however one measures
MLU.  Depending on what you are studying, matching for MLU  may or may not
provide you with an appropriate reference group.  For a discussion of this
problem see the following article, which ends by advocating language
matches as less confounded:

Plante, Elena; Swisher, Linda; Kiernan, Barbara;  Restrepo, Maria Adelaida
(1993). Language matches: Illuminating or confounding? Journal of Speech &
Hearing Research, 36(4), 772-776



Lynne E. Hewitt, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
Assistant Professor
Dept. of Communication Disorders
251 Health Center Bldg.
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, OH   43403

Phone: 419-372-7181
Fax: 419-372-8089