LUI Research

As we learn about new research publications involving the LUI with neurotypical or neurodivergent children we will link you to it here, along with links relevant to its use more broadly in community settings (e.g., early intervention programs). Open access articles are noted. Where an article is not open access, it is recommended you email the corresponding author who may be able to provide a version they can share at no cost.

INITIAL LUI DEVELOPMENT AND PSYCHOMETRICS BY D. O’NEILL AND COLLEAGUES

O’Neill, D. K. (2007). The Language Use Inventory: A parent-report measure of pragmatic language development for 18-47-month-old children. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. 50, 214-228. (Open Access)
These studies investigated the internal reliability and discriminative validity of the LUI. Internal reliability was strongly supported by the finding that alpha values for the subscales of the LUI were at or above acceptable levels (.80–.98), and steady growth in children’s pragmatic language development was demonstrated. The study of discriminant validity revealed sensitivity and specificity levels over 95%. Thus the LUI’s internal reliability and stability were strongly supported and its sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing between typically developing and language-delayed children exceeded even the most stringent criteria of 90% accuracy.

Pesco, D., & O'Neill, D. K. (2012). Predicting later language outcomes from the Language Use Inventory. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 55, 421-434. (Open Access)
The purpose of this study was to examine the predictive validity of the LUI. 348 children whose parents had completed the LUI were re-assessed at 5 to 6 years old with standardized, norm-referenced language measures that included the DELV-NR, CELF-P2, and the CCC-2. Parents also completed a report of developmental history. The relationship between scores on the LUI and later measures was examined through correlation, binary classification, and ROC curve analysis. For children aged 24 to 47 months at the time of LUI completion, LUI scores correlated significantly with language measure scores. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) was also calculated for four cut-off scores on the LUI, including –1.64 SD (the 5th percentile), a score that maximized sensitivity to 81% and specificity to 93%. These results showed that a child with a score at the −1.64 SD cutoff on the LUI had a 27 times greater probability (risk) of exhibiting later language difficulties than a child with a score above the cutoff. Even at the lower bound of the confidence interval, the risk was tenfold.

O’Neill, D. K. (2009). LUI Manual. Knowledge in Development, Inc. Waterloo, ON Canada. (Open Access: (pdf) of Chapter 5 (Development of the LUI and Psychometrics) and Chapter 6 (Standardization and Norms Development) from the LUI Manual (O'Neill, 2009))
These chapters detail the initial set of studies to develop the LUI, the standardization study, and a study of the LUI’s concurrent validity (Ch. 5 p 42ff) with the Communication and Symbolic Behaviour Scales (CSBS, Wetherby & Prizant 1993). Thirty 22-month-old children (15 girls and 15 boys) were administered the long form of the CSBS. Scaled scores were computed for 7 subscales of the CSBS considered (a priori) to potentially overlap in content with the areas of pragmatic functioning addressed by the LUI. Correlational results strongly supported the concurrent validity of the LUI with the pragmatics-relevant CSBS subscales (all p’s < .05). The strength of the correlations was notable given that administration of the LUI requires only 25 minutes of a parent’s time versus approximately 1 hour of testing with a trained examiner to administer the CSBS and 2-3 hours to score it. (Full access to the online LUI Manual is available via an account at Language Use Inventory at no cost. Email doneill@uwaterloo.ca)

PUBLICATIONS BY OTHER RESEARCHERS USING THE LUI WITH NEUROTYPICAL CHILDREN

Ronfard, S., Wei, R., & Rowe, M. (2021). Exploring the Linguistic, Cognitive, and Social Skills Underlying Lexical Processing Efficiency as Measured by the Looking-while-Listening Paradigm. Journal of Child Language, 1-24. doi:10.1017/S0305000921000106

McDonald, D., Colmer, S., Guest, S., Humber, D., Ward, C., Young, J. (2019). Parent implemented language intervention delivered by therapy assistants for two-year-olds at risk of language difficulties: a case study. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 35(2), 113-124.

Muhinyi, A., Rowe, M. L. (2019). Shared reading with preverbal infants and later language development. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 64.

Hoh, E. (2018). Exploring culturally competent telepractice in early communication intervention: cultural considerations in working with parent-child pairs in Malaysia. [Masters Thesis]. Massey University. (Open Access)

Matthews, D., Biney, H., Abbot-Smith, K. (2018). Individual differences in children’s pragmatic ability: A review of associations with formal language, social cognition, and executive functions. Language Learning and Development, 14(3), 186-223.

Abbot-Smith, K., Nurmsoo, E., Croll, R. (2015). How children aged 2;6 tailor verbal expressions to interlocutor informational needs. Journal of Child Language, 43(6), 1277-1291.

Matthews, D., Behne, T., Lieven, E., Tomasello, M. (2012). Origins of the human pointing gesture: a training study. Developmental Science, 15(6), 817-829.

PUBLICATIONS BY OTHER RESEARCHERS USING AND/OR MENTIONING THE LUI WITH CLINICAL POPULATIONS (presented roughly alphabetical by clinical group)

1. Autism Spectrum Disorder / siblings of children with autism (see also Pragmatic impairment / Social (pragmatic) Communication Disorder)

Conti E., Chericoni, N., Costanzo, V., et al. (2020) Moving Toward Telehealth Surveillance Services for Toddlers at Risk for Autism During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11:565999. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.565999.

Flanagan, H. E., Smith, I. M., Davidson, F. (2019). The Assessment of Phase of Preschool Language: applying the language benchmarks framework to characterize language profiles and change in four- to five-year-olds with autism spectrum disorder. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 4, 1-17. (Open Access)

Hus, Y. (2017). Issues in identification and assessment of children with autism and a proposed resource toolkit for speech-language pathologists. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 69(1-2), 27-37. (Open Access)

Luyster, R., Arunachalam, S. (2018). Brief Report: Learning Language Through Overhearing in Children with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50, 2616–2624.

Ellawadi, A. B., Weismer, S. E. (2015). Using spoken language benchmarks to characterize expressive language skills of young children with autism spectrum disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 24(4), 696-707.

Miller, M., Young, G. S., Hutan, T., Johnson, S., Schwichtenberg, A. J., & Ozonoff, S. (2015). Early pragmatic language difficulties in siblings of children with autism: implications for DSM‐5 social communication disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 56(7), 774-781.

Simmons, E. S., Paul, R., & Volkmar, F. (2014). Assessing Pragmatic Language in Autism Spectrum Disorder: The Yale in vivo Pragmatic Protocol. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research 57(6), 2162-2173. (Open Access version on DigitalCommons@SHU).

Volkmar, F. R., Paul, R. S., Rogers, S. J., & Pelphrey, K. A. (2014) (Eds.). Handbook of Autism and Pervasive Developmental Disorders.(4th Ed.) Vol. 2: Assessment, Interventions and Policy. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. The authors note that the LUI is "the only standardized measure specially designed to assess toddlers’ and preschool children’s pragmatic competence.

Kasari, C., Brady, N., Lord, C., Tager-Flusberg, H. (2013). Assessing the minimally verbal school-age children with autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 6(6), 479-493.

Tager-Flusberg, H., Rogers, S., Cooper, J., Landa, R., Lord, C., Paul, R., Rice, M, Stoel-Gammon, C, Wetherby, A., & Yoder, P. (2009). Defining spoken language benchmarks and selecting measures of expressive language development for young children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 52(3), 643. (Open Access)

2. ADHD

Rints, A., McAuley, T., Nilsen, E. S. (2014). Social Communication Is Predicted by Inhibitory Ability and ADHD Traits in Preschool-Aged Children: A Mediation Model. Journal of Attention Disorders, 19(10), 901-911.

3. Cerebral Palsy

Caynes, K., Rose, T. A., Burmester, D., Ware, R. S., & Johnston, L. M. (2021), Reproducibility and validity of the Functional Communication Classification System for young children with cerebral palsy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.14844

4. Developmental Language Disorder / Language Disorder or Impairment/Expressive Language delay/ Late talkers (see also Social (pragmatic) communication)

Denman, D., Speyer, R., Munro, N., Pearce, W. M., Chen, Y. W., & Cordier, R. (2017). Psychometric Properties of Language Assessments for Children Aged 4-12 Years: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1515. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01515 (Open Access)

Bishop, D. V. M., Snowling, M. J., Thompson, P. A., Greenhalgh, T., Boyle, C., Westerveld, M. F., Mckean, C. (2016). CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study: Identifying Language Impairments in Children. Plos One, 11(12). (Open Access)

Dockrell, J. E., Marshall, C. R. (2014). Measurement issues: assessing language skills in young children. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 20(2), 116-125.

Hawa, V. V., & Spanoudis, G. (2013). Toddlers with delayed expressive language: An overview of the characteristics, risk factors and language outcomes. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(2), 400-407.

Paul, R., & Norbury, C. (2011). Language Disorders from Infancy Through Adolescence (4th Ed.). Mosby: St. Louis, MO. The authors note that “both [the CCC-2 and LUI] are standardized and can provide information across a range of interactional behaviors that are important to social communication.” p. 450.

McLeod, S., Harrison, L. J. (2009). Epidemiology of speech and language impairment in a nationally representative sample of 4- to 5-year-old children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing. 52(5), 1213-1229.

5. Down syndrome / Multi-system disabilities

Foster-Cohen, S., van Bysterveldt, A., Papp, V. (2020). The roles of language use and vocabulary size in the emergence of word combining in children with complex neurodevelopmental disabilities. Journal of Child Language, 48(1), 202-214. doi:10.1017/S0305000920000136

Foster-Cohen, S. & van Bysterveldt, A. K. (2016). Assessing the communication development of children with language delay through parent multi-questionnaire reporting. Speech, Language and Hearing, 19(2), 79-86.

Schutz, Tricia M. (2014). Down syndrome: An investigation into effective assessment and intervention to increase overall communicative abilities. Research Papers. Paper 470. Southern Illinois University Carbondale OpenSIUC. (Open Access).

6. Neglected children

Hyter, Y. (2021). Childhood maltreatment consequences on social pragmatic communication: A systematic review of the literature. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups (SIG 1), 6, 262-287. doi: 10.1044/2020_PERSP-20-00222.

Di Sante, M., Sylvestre, A., Bouchard, C., Leblond, J. (2020). Parental behaviours associated with the level of pragmatic language ability among 42-month-old neglected children. Child Abuse and Neglect, 104, 104482.

Di Sante, M., Sylvestre, A., Bouchard, C., Leblond, J. (2019). The pragmatic language skills of severely neglected 42-month-old children: results of the ELLAN study. Child Maltreatment, 24(3), 244-253.

7. Pragmatic impairment / Social (pragmatic) communication / Social Communication Disorder / (see also Autism and Developmental Language Disorder)

Izaryk, K., Edge, R., & Lechwar, D. (2021). A survey of speech-language pathologists’ approaches to assessing social communication disorders in children. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups (SIG 1), 6, 1-17. doi: 10.1044/2020_PERSP-20-00147

Joschko, L. (2019). Pragmatische störungen im kindesalter: auftreten, erscheinungsform, und diagnostik. [Bachelor's Thesis]. University of Potsdam. (Open Access on ResearchGate)

Hyter Y. D. (2017). Pragmatic Assessment and Intervention in Children. In Cummings, L. (Ed.), Research in Clinical Pragmatics: Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, vol 11. (pp. 493-526). Springer, Cham.

Dohmen, A., Bishop, D., Chiat, S., Roy, P. (2016). Body movement imitation and early language as predictors of later social communication and language outcomes: a longitudinal study. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 1, 1-15. (Open Access)

Turkstra, L. S., Clark, A., Burgess, S., Hengst, J. A., Wetheimer, J. C., Paul, D. (2016). Pragmatic communication abilities in children and adults: implications for rehabilitation professionals. Disability and Rehabilitation, 39(18), 1872-1885.

Elleseff, T. (2015). Assessing social communication abilities of school-aged children. Perspectives on School-Based Issues, 16(3), 79-86.

Fujiki, M., & Brinton, B. (2015). Social communication assessment and intervention for children with language impairment. In Hwa-Froelich, D. A. (Ed.). Social Communication Development and Disorders. New York: Psychology Press. The authors note that “..the Language Use Inventory (O’Neill, 2007), can provide a useful way of organizing the impressions of stakeholders.” p. 235.

Swineford, L. B., Thurm, A., Baird, F., Wetherby, A. M., & Swedo, S. (2014). Social (pragmatic) communication disorder: a research review of this new DSM-5 diagnostic category. Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 6(1), 41.( Open Access)

Moeller, D., & Ritterfeld, U. (2010). Spezifische Sprachentwicklungsstoerungen und Pragmatische Kompetenzen. Sprach, Stimme Gehoer, 34(02), 84-91.

Tager-Flusberg, H., Rogers, S., Cooper, J., Landa, R., Lord, C., Paul, R., Rice, M, Stoel-Gammon, C, Wetherby, A., & Yoder, P. (2009). Defining spoken language benchmarks and selecting measures of expressive language development for young children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 52(3), 643. (Open Access version in PMC)

8. Preterm children

Gledhill, N., Scott, G., de Vries, N. (2018). Routine follow-up of preterm infants in New Zealand. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 54(5), 535-540.

9. Smith-Magenis syndrome

Hesson, A. (2014). An investigation of the language and communication characteristics observed in children with Smith-Magenis syndrome. [Doctoral Dissertation]. Eastern Michigan University. (Open Access)

10. Traumatic brain injury

Wiseman-Hakes, C., Kakonge, L., Doherty, M., & Beauchamp, M. (2020). A conceptual framework of social communication: clinical applications to pediatric traumatic brain injury. Seminars in Speech and Language, 41(2), 143-160.

RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS REGARDING TRANSLATIONS OF THE LUI

Note: See also the section Translations on this website to access available translations and learn more about ongoing translations.

MULTILINGUAL CHILDREN (NON-ACADEMIC PUBLICATIONS)

O’Malley-Keighran, M. (2018, October 15). Q&A: How can a monolingual professional offer Speech and Language Therapy for a bilingual child? Multilingual Parenting.

Alberta Health Services. (2017, September 1). Speech-language pathology assessment for preschool English language learners: a clinical guide. Dokumen.

REPORTS DETAILING USE OF THE LUI, OR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR USE OF THE LUI, IN WIDER COMMUNITY HEALTH OR SCHOOL SETTINGS FOR SCREENING, ASSESSMENT, PROGRAM EVALUATION, AND MORE

Ottawa-Carleton District School Board. (2018, July 11). 2017-2018 Special Education Plan. The LUI is included in the list of educational, speech-language and psychological testing materials used in the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board within the 2017-2018 Special Education Plan released by the school board. Among other well-known measures that were included were the MacArthur-Bates CDI, the PLS (3 & 4), the CELF (4 & 5), and the PPVT (III & IV).

Alberta Health Services. (2017, September 1). Speech-language pathology assessment for preschool English language learners: a clinical guide. Dokumen. The LUI is listed as an assessment resource for young children learning more than one language; the PLS is also listed. Specifically, it was mentioned that the LUI can be used with children that have an exposure to a second language of under 20%, or if the child has been exposed to English for a minimum of 12 months.

Lammert, J., Heinemeier, S., Schaaf, J.M., & Fiore, T.A. (2016, June 16). Evaluating Special Education Preservice Programs: Resource Toolkit. Rockville, MD: Westat. The purpose of this resource toolkit is to provide templates for the purpose of selecting samples, developing draft instruments, monitoring data collection, reviewing project evaluation reports, etc. to the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). In a sample evaluation plan of graduate performance and student outcomes, the template asked the following question: To what extent do graduates demonstrate success with children/students with disabilities? An example of how to approach answering this question was given using the LUI, where the LUI would be used to collect data biannually from children being served by graduates in order to assess the development of these children. It was noted that “the LUI is a standardized instrument with well-known characteristics,” and that it would “allow an accurate estimation of needed sample sizes by our statistician.” p.145.

The Hanen Centre. (2016). The Research Base for TalkAbility - the Hanen Program for Parents of Verbal Children on the Autism Spectrum. In the document detailing the research background for this program, the LUI is used in pre-program assessment.

Infant Mental Health Promotion, Public Health Agency of Canada. (2015, October) Community Reports: A collaborative approach to embedding the science of infant mental health and enhancing infant mental health services. Early Childhood Community Development Centre. This online resource includes services and tools with the purpose of supporting infant mental health in various communities across Canada. The LUI is listed among well-known questionnaires such as the PLS-5, MacArthur-Bates CDI, PPVT-III, PPVT-4, EVT, and CELF, used by Toronto Preschool Speech and Language Services.

Health Nexus. On Track: Section 8 - Screening Tools and Programs used in Ontario. Best Start. The LUI is included in a list of screening measures used in Ontario as a part of the On Track guide: a tool for professionals working with young children and families.

UK Centre for Excellence and Outcomes in Children and Young People’s Services. (2012, September) Nottinghamshire’s Sure Start Children’s Centres ‘Home Talk’ Service: Supporting Two-Year-Olds with Delayed Language Skills and Their Parents/Carers. Included in this UK report, the LUI was used to evaluate a parent-implemented intervention, Home Talk, for children with delayed language development.

Formosa, S. & Heinz, L. (2003) TLC3 Vancouver Project Final Report CONNECTIONS. The TLC3 Vancouver Project in Vancouver was part of a seven-site, five-year national project funded by the Lawson Foundation designed to enhance language and cognitive development in the context of early relationships in children from birth to 5 years. It was a partnership of the Vancouver Infant Development Program,Developmental Disabilities Association, and the Alan Cashmore Centre, Vancouver Community MentalHealth Service of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. Parent-Child MotherGoose Programs and Developmental Screening were provided. The LUI was one of the outcome measures used, and the report’s findings indicate that the children’s scores on the CSBS- DP-Behavior sample at the end of the program were significantly correlated with their scores on the LUI one year later (p. 20).