The reading summary is done by: Andrew Anderson (ENGL300-1) and Nick Compton (ENGL300-2)
Due by class time on: Wed., Feb. 16th, 2011
The responses by the whole class are due by class time on: Fri., Feb. 18th, 2011
The text you need to read is here.
by: Andrew Anderson
Ganger starts out the article talking about how twins may be delayed in language development, and how they may be more prone to language disabilities. Ganger researched several other articles to obtain the relationship between twins and language development. She goes on to say that there is a consensus between the articles reviewed that being a twin does in fact make a child more prone to language delays. However, singletons can be affected by the same factors, but are less likely. One of the studies Ganger reviewed was the Day (1932) article. In this study Day observed utterances from children while they were playing and measured them on language complexity. He found that twins could be behind by as much as two years by the age of five. The next study Ganger reviewed was the Davis (1937) article. This author used the same method as the previous study, but used children a little older. He found that twins were more likely to have articulation problems, but would catch up to singletons on average.
Next, Ganger goes on to discuss the flaws with the studies. She found that there was no effort to exclude twins who had language, speech, or hearing pathology. Also, information such as birth weight, and gestation period weren't recorded which could be factors in language delay. Another fault with these studies was that twins were averaged as a group, but the twin's data aren't independent of his/her twin.
After discussing the flaws, Ganger goes on to discuss other studies that have been done following the Day and Davis articles. One article by Lytton and Conway found that generally use less speech overall, and that environmental variables affect speech more than biological factors. One other study by Akermann and Thomassen found that low birth weight plays a role in standardized language capabilities.
Next, Ganger discusses non-biological variables affecting language development. In an article by Reznick, it was found that the twin situation may not be that different that the normal sibling situation. The lower a child is in the birth order the more disadvantages he/she has on IQ tests. Also, generally the more older siblings you have, the lower your IQ. Ganger finishes the article by making sure the point taken from this article was not that twin's language is doomed and hopeless. All of the results outlined are found on average, not in every situation. It is not the fact of being a twin that can slow language development, rather the factors that are associated with being a twin.
____________________________________________________________
By Nick Compton
The website Are Twins Delayed in Language Development was prepared by Jennifer Ganger. This website was created to explore whether or not twins are delayed in language development. Ganger starts with an introduction that reviews some conclusions that she found on the topic. The conclusions suggest that being a twin does indeed delay language development because of social and biological factors. However, these factors also have an effect on some singletons and not all twins. This is why Ganger believes twins should not be considered as their own special population.
Next Ganger went on to her first body paragraph on the subject, The Early Years. In this section, research from the 1930s is shown. The two research documents are Day and Davis. Day’s research consisted of studying 80 pairs of twins and 140 singletons from ages 1.5-5.5. The research showed that twins were roughly 2 years behind singletons in measures of language complexity. However, Ganger found a few problems with the results. Twins with language, speech, or hearing pathology were not excluded, which is more common in twins. There was no recorded birth weight or twin gestation, or birth order. Also, some twins were observed together, which created situations for them to compete against each other for attention causing utterances. The final problem Ganger found was that the groups’ statistics were all averaged and then compared, which was flawed because some twins were observed together.
Ganger then decided to look into research done in the 70s and 80s. In the research of Lytton (1980) and Conway, Lytton, & Pysh (1980), Ganger saw results that were similar to those of the 30s. These researchers claimed that biological and environmental differences lead to language delays in twins. Also, they called the environmental differences more significant than biological.
Information from studies in the 70s by Mittler followed. His studies suggest that twins at the age of 4 years old were roughly 6 months behind singletons of the same age. Yet again, Ganger found problems with the research. Mittler’s research suggested that children whose first word came after 18 months performed worse than those born earlier. Other research from the 70s, this time by McKeown and Edwards showed that twins averaged 5 points lower on tests in the 11th grade. After this information Ganger decided to throw in a random bit of research. In this research by Hay, Prior, Collett, and Williams it is shown that twin boys at the ages 30 months were 2 to 6 months behind the norm while twin girls were about the same as singletons.
Next Ganger explored Biological factors. According to research, low birth weight singletons had similar measures of intellect as twins. The twin’s numbers were significantly better than the singletons in some cases. Non-Biological factors showed that birth order effects IQ in all children, the youngest child has the lowest IQ on average. Ganger finishes by wrapping up her thoughts, she concludes that being a twin doesn’t make one ‘doomed’ and that environmental and social variables effect every child.
I really enjoyed this article. I thought Ganger did a great job exploring all of the possibilities and factors that play a role in language development of twins. As a speech communications major I find this to be an interesting topic. I personally believe that one’s parents and environment is a major factor in language development. Furthermore, I disagree with the statement that birth order puts one at risk of disadvantage when it comes to language development and IQ. I think that speech and language develops faster when a child is exposed to daily language and conversations. I don’t believe that twins are at a disadvantage any more than a single child could be. Biological and behavioral disorders would be the only culprit outside of one’s environment and home.
ReplyDeleteThe author has pointed out an interesting topic that “Are twins delayed in language development?” through the article. Those sociolinguists or psycholinguistics had done some researches and found that twins are delayed in language development compare with singletons on average. Furthermore, the younger one in twins is not smarter than he older one. I think this kind of research is quite interesting. Certainly, the results of those researches are basically on average. They are not applied to every case. Additional, I agree with that the environmental factor is really an important element to influence a baby’s acquisition no matter it is from twins or singletons.
ReplyDeleteThe article emphasized birth order and twin's language development. I think that it really depends on the environment and the person not so much the birth-order. Although taking only one basic psychology course freshman year, taught me that birth order does have a influence on one's personality so in a roundabout way, yes I can see the connection. I do believe one's personality does have an affect on their willingness (or lack of) to evolve as a speaker.
ReplyDeleteThis being a study, relates to what we are currently working on in class, seeing as how we are conducting our own studies with the general public. Through the current project, I have also found out how easy it is to word results in a way that is favorable to your hypothesis. Not saying that Ganger did that, but I think it is a possibility. I just refuse to believe that a persons IQ level depends on their birth-order. I think, it is what one makes of it. If you have the passion to learn and evolve not just grammatically but as a human-being, you will.
Although this article was very interesting, I don't necessarily agree with all of it. I really doubt that birth order has anything to do with the development of language skills or your IQ. I think later in life your siblings can affect your IQ and language if they are smarter than you or have better language skills than you because you would constantly be around them. That's not really what this article is about, though. This article is more about the order in which you're born.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Megan Berns has said about this article. In addition, I am not sure that I agree about twins having delayed development compared to singletons. I have 5 younger siblings (one adopted), including a set of twins. They are both 14 years old now (one boy, one girl). They have some speech impairments, such as slight stuttering and sort of slurred speech, which could be partially due to their braces, but they spoke like that before they had braces too. However the other two boys, who are 11 and 8, have some language development problems as well. They have a terrible time reading and they have a slight stutter when they speak, too. But the lack of reading probably hasn't got anything to with it, because the twins read all the time, yet they still have the problem. So I think it really has more to do with the household in which you are brought up, and the people who are around you.
ReplyDeleteThis article, Are Twins Delayed in Language Development, discusses just that. The author, Jennifer Ganger, brings up a few older studies that have been done on this topic. The main conclusion from these previous studies is that the twins may be affected by other factors and not just something twin related. Twins with hearing disabilities, low birth weight, and gestation period, among other things, have not been fully taken into account leading to questions of the accuracy of these results which have the twins behind in language until around the age of four. Some of the factors thought to affect this language development may be a little closer than genetic: twins spend less time receiving individual attention/speech, they often take part in 3 way conversations, and the competition between twins for attention. Taking into account that single surviving twins perform better than paired twins but still worse than singletons, makes these factors more likely. Birth order, even with siblings which are not twins, also affects children.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Ganger used statistics and studies from others to fuel her arguments I don't fully agree with her. I think that low birth weight and other health risks have an affect on all children. With that said I do feel it is the environment that the child is raised in that will determine whether or not they fully develop speech impairment and such. If a child is raised with help on speaking, taught how to say things properly, and this is done on a daily basis they will be fine. Vice versa if those things are not done that is when problems come in, it's like any other skill for everyone it takes practice. Plus twins are different even if they look the same so I think it is presumptuous to say the younger one will probably have more trouble these things can affect anyone.
ReplyDeleteI somewhat enjoyed reading this article by Jennifer Ganger. In addition, I think this was a good summary. I feel that it didn't really apply to me because I'm the only child. At the same time, It is interesting to learn about studies like this. I don't particularity agree with the fact that twin's language development is delayed or by the fact that human IQ levels decrease each child at a time. I do think that genetics play a very critical role in language development.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the summary for this article was very good and noted many of the main points. I found this article to be somewhat interesting, but I did not agree with the topic. I do not think that Ganger had very good evidence that substantially supports the argument that twins are more likely to fall behind in language development. I think that the determining factor of children being delayed in language development, is the child alone.
ReplyDeleteThis article deals with an interesting subject matter. it isn't like anything else i have read, which made this an interesting article. i can't say that it directly relates to me because i am not a twin. in terms of the IQ test among different aged siblings, i can see why that happens, because parenting isn't something that anyone is automatically good at. For a parent, teaching their youngest child something they tried to teach their oldest would be much easier because they are exposed to different techniques and better understand what they are doing.
ReplyDeleteI thought this article was very informative and explored the topic fully. The summary was well done and included major points by the author. My opinion on this topic is that intelligence is accumulated over time based on your up-bringing and environment, rather than bilogical means. Twins may be behind singetons, but in a child's first years that is when they truly develop. Order of birth will not play a large part compared to whether or not the child attended pre-school. It might have to do with attention and quality of schooling instead. I would be very excited to read an article about that.
ReplyDeleteThe summary written by Andrew Anderson was very detailed and informative. I believe the summary covered the entirety of the topic in which I was able to grasp every point that the author was trying to convey. With all do respect, the topic being discussed by the author is irrelevant. I strongly disagree in which intelligence is derived and learned as you grow up over time rather then being intelligent through biological purposes. I don’t believe that twins are at a disadvantage any more than a single child could be. Being intelligent takes time though a student or child is being taught by through many teachers that provide them with learning materials and tools. Being smart biological in my opinion is not true, Intelligence is created through time. This article was a great one and I would recommend everyone to take time to read this because it provides great sources of information.
ReplyDeleteAndrew did a good job at summarizing the article. But one thing that I disagree on is what the author had to say in his article. I completely disagree with what Granger mentions in his article. The fact that twins have a higher rate of language disabilities is strange to me. I believe that anybody can be born like that and not just twins. Intelligence is learned as you grow up and over time that learning increases. I don't believe being intelligent is 100% entirely through biological purposes. But it is also interesting to read about what others think twins and singletons have in common and don't.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed this article. I believe Ganger did a great job at explaining all the factors that comes into play when it comes to Language development of twins. Ganger points out that research has shown that twins are delayed in language development than singleton children. It was also pointed out that the older twin was always the smartest. I found all of this information to be interesting. Mainly because I always thought a persons state of development has to do more so with his/her environment. If the person lives in an environment where those things are forced, he/she would be much better at it. If the child is a product of an environment where development in that aera is not important, then it would be harder for the child to develop language skills.
ReplyDeleteThis article was very well summarized by the two students. Being that I have several sets of twins in my family, I thought it was very interesting to learn about their learning abilities. However, I am not so convinced that in the case of twins the second is not as smart as the first. My reason being, in the case of the twins in my family, neither twin is no smarter than the other; or at least not noticeably. I believe that speech as language is learned through exposure to language during childhood. The concept of learning being completely biological is the idea that I have the biggest problem with when reading this article. It has very much to do with ones environment.
ReplyDeleteI agree that twins should not be considered a special population that is differentially at risk for the mere fact of being a twin. Because if most of the studies show that they make-up the ground while still in early devilment. So by the time the twins make it to high school they will be at par with their singletons classmates.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading this article because it involved a subject that was unfamiliar to me. Ganger does a great job with not only telling readers about her opinion on the subject but she also provides readers with sufficient research that allows her subjective topic to be found accurate. She also allows her readers to indulge in a more personal sense of the article. The author also uses biological and social references to educate readers on the topic also. Both summaries were good as well. Especially, the first one. It provided reader with alot of detail about the article.
ReplyDeleteI never had any idead that twins had a slower development in language, I know twins and have since my first day of grade school. I never noticed that they were stunted so to speak. The fct that they catch up is a good thing so it's almost as if it never happened. I also never knew they wanted twins to be in a dfiiferent category of people, but it isn't all that surprising in that the amount of categories grow over small differences.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting article. I found it to be fun to read and I learned a few things. I could not believe that there was a difference in the older twins learning from the younger twins. This is something that I feel should not be a major factor in leaning. I have always thought that nurture has had more to do with learning and growing up than does nature, but I guess that my point could be argued for days. It is also interesting that single child household are ahead of households with twins when it comes to teaching/learning, I found this to be very interesting.
ReplyDeleteI thought the article was very interesting. I never noticed if there was a problem with twins and speech. It does make sense to me now because my little brothers are twins and one has a speech problem. I think both students did a very good job at summarizing the article. I thought that Ganger did not take into consideration all all attributes that would had to the problem such as weight and gestation period odd. I would think writing a research paper on this subject, Ganger would try look up information on everything that would go on in the womb during this time. Overall, good job!
ReplyDeleteI found this article to be interesting. The article itself was very informative. There are many points in the article that I agree with and disagree with, but overall I thought it was interesting. Overall both studetns did a wonderful job and gave very detailed summaries.
ReplyDeleteI found this article to be one of the most interesting I've read this semester. The topic was one that had never occurred to me before. I can see how the relationship between twins and their competition for attention could cause linguistic development delays. However, it seems like the study was marred by several fundamental problems that may have damaged the validity of the results.
ReplyDeleteI think the summaries and the article were both written very well. It was definitely one of the more interesting articles we have read. There was a lot of information of twins learning abilities, and how they are slower. The author of the article does a good job by providing research and factual information as well as her opinion. I like that Ganger referred to older studies done on this same topic. I have had friends who were twins and one of them was a lot quicker at picking up concepts. I can understand how the twin information can be true, I just don't feel like it is fair.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting article and I am not a doctor or teacher or anything but I honestly didn't think birth order had anything to do with the learning progress. I don't have many twins in my family so I haven't experienced first hand if what the author is saying is true or not. I do believe you can not compare twins with other children but I never realized it might be more difficult for them to learn and adjust to language. Great summaries and article. Very imformative.
ReplyDeleteI found this article quite interesting but I disagree with the author when it comes to birth order with twins and how it can effect one or the other way of speaking or their speech. I believe speech is something taught and something that people pick up. I don't think the order of the way twins comes out has anything to do with it. Overall I think the summaries were great as well as the article.
ReplyDeleteGangers article "Twins and Language Development", is the most interesting article I have read so far because I am a fraternal twin. I do not agree with some the points made in this article but it did make some interesting points that I have never taken into consideration. The main point that I did not agree with in this article is how non-biological factors were taken into consideration more than biological. I feel each factor should be equally explored. The main point I did agree with is that twins language patterns do develop differently from one another. As I'v watched home movies over the years I can blaintly see that I began to form words better than my sister.
ReplyDeleteSo about the article i don't understand why twins needed to be tested. their human just like us it just two people born at the same time to the same person. I have two younger cousins that are twins are they never had any problems with speaking properly. Yes they had their own language growing up when they didnt know how to talk but soon they started talking like normal kids. I belive that the article and the research was truly just a waste of time and i dont agree with any of it.
ReplyDeleteThe article, "Twins and Language Development" was a interesting article and both guys did a great job summarizing it. This article discusses if twins are farther behind single born in language development. The author looked at studies done in the 30's that gave evidence proving that twins were behind. But she did not think that the studies were completely accurate because they did not take into account if the twins had hearing, or speaking problems. So next she decided to look into biological factors such as birth order. She explains that people lower(or the youngest) have the most problems on IQ tests. I do not believe that is true, because I am the youngest out of 4 and I have never had trouble on IQ tests or any type of tests for that matter. I do not believe because you are either a twin, or the first born, middle born, etc has any type of effect on your speaking or language habits or ability to perform on tests. I believe that the environment you are raised, the schools you attend, and your own will are what makes somebody good or bad at language development, or IQ tests.
ReplyDeleteThis article was a great example of the kind of research paper we are working on in class now. Ganger dove deep into all the topics and considered everything. She explored several different researchers and their conclusions to prove her point. I used to be speech communications major and we learned a lot about early childhood development and different factors that led to slower developing children, as well as things that led to faster developing children. Environment is a huge component in a child’s language development and I firmly believe that birth order has nothing to do with that. A child will excel or move along in development at a normal rate if they are exposed to an ample amount of communication every day whether that is through parents, babysitters or guardians. This article was very interesting and very well composed. Ganger went above and beyond to prove her point.
ReplyDeleteI really didn't really grasp the full statement of the article. The twins being tested didn't really make sense to me. Sure they are identical, but they don't think the same or they don't have the same pace of thought. I thought the research was very cool and informative, but the article as a whole just didn't get my mind engulfed in it.
ReplyDeleteWhen I started reading this article, I became upset because they were blaming being grammatically challenged just because you were a twin. When I made it through the article my mind set changed because the author went on to say that there were many biological and environmental factors in later language abilities.
ReplyDelete