References of "Elbouz, Mouna"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
See detailApprentissage lexical et généralisation chez les enfants retardés mentaux
Elbouz, Mouna; Comblain, Annick ULg

in Groosmann, F.; Paveau, M. A.; Petit, G. (Eds.) Didactique du lexique : langue, cognition, discours (2005)

Detailed reference viewed: 82 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLexical learning and generalization in children with Down syndrome
Elbouz, Mouna; Comblain, Annick ULg

Poster (2003, May 23)

We study the lexical learning by children who have a genetic syndrome leading to mental retardation, the Down syndrome. Children with Down syndrome learn the names of new objects displayed in a scene. Our ... [more ▼]

We study the lexical learning by children who have a genetic syndrome leading to mental retardation, the Down syndrome. Children with Down syndrome learn the names of new objects displayed in a scene. Our contribution explore to what extent the context associated with the object is beneficial or detrimental to the association between an object and its name in recall, production and a comprehension tasks. We assessed whether children with Down syndrome could learn four non-words associated with unfamiliar animals or musical instruments displayed in a scene (the context of presentation) and whether their performance would be influenced by the congruence of the context of presentation between the learning and the test phases. We hypothesized that the contextual congruence between the learning and the test will enhance children’s performance. In contrast, the association between an object and a new context in the test phase (compared to the association in the learning phase) would decrease performance. The results don’t confirm completely our hypothesis. There is no effect of context of presentation in recall and comprehension tasks. The effect of context of presentation is present only in denomination task. We compare this results with those of “normal” children. Consequences on lexical learning are discussed. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 45 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailReferential communication in Fragile-X syndrome
Comblain, Annick ULg; Elbouz, Mouna

Poster (2003, May 23)

Language profile of fragile-X syndrome individuals looks like the one of Down syndrome individuals, except for phonological and pragmatic abilities. If the pragmatic aspect of language is relatively ... [more ▼]

Language profile of fragile-X syndrome individuals looks like the one of Down syndrome individuals, except for phonological and pragmatic abilities. If the pragmatic aspect of language is relatively preserve in Down syndrome, it is one of the most impaired language component in fragile-X syndrome. One aspect of the pragmatic component of language remains almost unexplored in this pathology : the common ground management and the organization of the old and the new information in conversation. Sample : 4 fragile-X boys aged from 6 to 12 years-old and 4 typically developing children matched on the lexical age Tasks : 6 referential communication tasks proposed to children both in speaker condition and in listener condition. Tasks were distributed in two groups : 1] building tasks, and 2] combination tasks. Groups of 2 boys work together on referential communication tasks. In simple situations FXS boys can be as efficient speakers and listeners as typically developing children. Difficulties mainly appear when FXS boys have to deal with spatial and ordinal attributes. FXS boys manage less efficiently with an incomplete message especially when it is given by an adult. In FXS syndrome, the efficiency of communication mainly depends of the nature of the items attributes to communicate. Spatial information implies the mastery of vocabulary and concepts which seems to be deficient in several etiologies of mental retardation including FXS boys. Ordinal information implies the manipulation of information that are intrinsically more demanding than nominal dimensions because they are inherently relational. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 29 (5 ULg)
Peer Reviewed
See detailReferental communication in Down syndrome : Assessment and remediation program
Elbouz, Mouna; Comblain, Annick ULg

Poster (2003, May 23)

Referential communication focuses on the reference process which consists in using words in order to describe objects called "referents". The ability of someone to give information regarding what he sees ... [more ▼]

Referential communication focuses on the reference process which consists in using words in order to describe objects called "referents". The ability of someone to give information regarding what he sees, thinks or feels as well as his ability to understand messages that he hears slowly develops between 6 and 11 years-old in normally developing children. Development of these abilities in Down syndrome children is much more difficult as these children seem to be relatively insensitive to the interlocutor needs in a situation of communication. Our study focuses on the ability oaf Down syndrome children in giving or receiving a correct message. The paradigm we used is the one of Glucksberg et al. (1966). The eight selected Down syndrome children were between 4;10 and 8;5 years-old (the youngest group) and 12;1 and 14;1 (the oldest group). They were matched with a group of normally developing children on the basis of metal age. Different referential communication tasks were proposed as a pre-test. Each child was assessed in the speaker (with another child first and secondly with and adult) and receptor situation (only with another child). At the end of the pre-test, half of the Down syndrome children received training activities of referential communication during 8 weeks. After the training sessions, the children were post-tested. The results show qualitative and quantitative differences between the youngest and the oldest Down syndrome children, on one hand, and between normally developing children and Down syndrome on the other hand. The messages of Down syndrome children are less spontaneous than those of normally developing children, the messages contain fewer information and the responses are more often inadequate. The training seems to have positive effects on Down syndrome children performances, especially on the oldest children. But we notice that the training seems to influence the speaker abilities only. The receptor abilities seems to remain unaffected by the training sessions. Our study gives some information about the area of language the less studied in Down syndrome. However, researches are still necessary in order to complete the intervention perspectives. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 48 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailApprentissage lexical et généralisation chez les enfants retardés mentaux
Elbouz, Mouna; Comblain, Annick ULg; Thibaut, Jean-Pierre

Conference (2003, March 14)

Pour de nombreux aspects du développement lexical, des données concernant les enfants retardés mentaux de diverses étiologies sont disponibles, la plus étudiée étant la personne trisomique 21. On a ainsi ... [more ▼]

Pour de nombreux aspects du développement lexical, des données concernant les enfants retardés mentaux de diverses étiologies sont disponibles, la plus étudiée étant la personne trisomique 21. On a ainsi montré que les enfants normaux et retardés mentaux acquièrent les mêmes premiers lexèmes et relations sémantiques, qu’ils appliquent les mêmes stratégies d’acquisition de nouveaux mots, qu’ils montrent les mêmes effets de prototypie dans les tâches lexicales et manifestent des effets de priming sémantique. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 106 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe Fragile-X syndrome : what about the deficit in the pragmatic component ?
Comblain, Annick ULg; Elbouz, Mouna

in Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology (2002), 2(3), 3-22

Language profile of fragile-X syndrome people looks like the one of Down syndrome people, except for phonological and pragmatic abilities. It's this last aspect that we want to study and describe. If the ... [more ▼]

Language profile of fragile-X syndrome people looks like the one of Down syndrome people, except for phonological and pragmatic abilities. It's this last aspect that we want to study and describe. If the pragmatic aspect of language is relatively preserve (excepting referential communication) in Down syndrome, it is one of the most impaired language component in fragile-X syndrome. Discourse of fragile-X persons generally contains a lot of repetitions, perseverations and stereotypy. Echolalia is also very frequent. These behaviors are well documented in the literature but, we do not know, for now, the reasons of these repetitions and perseverations. Are they the consequence of a real pragmatic disorder or the consequence of motor difficulties ? Another aspect of the pragmatic component of language remains almost unexplored in this pathology : the common ground management and the organisation of the old and the new information in conversation. It's this last point that we want to explore. Studying this topic in fragile-X syndrome allow is the continuity of our previous work on referential communication abilities in Down syndrome. Having data on both pathologies will lead to interesting theorical, practical and clinical comparisons. We decided to work with 6 to 12 years-old fragile-X boys. Groups of two boys will work together on referential communication tasks. We will propose traditional experimental situations (speaker and receptor with another child or with an adult) and more original situations in which we allow or not visual contact between the participants during the experimentation. By this, we want to see if, as certain researches claim it, visual contact will modify the nature, the quantity and the quality of verbal output in fragile-X syndrome children. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 83 (6 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe fragileX syndrome : What about the deficit innthe pragmatic component of language ?
Comblain, Annick ULg; Elbouz, Mouna

in Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology (2002), 2(3), 29-58

Language profile of fragile-X syndrome individuals looks like the one of Down syndrome individuals, except for phonological and pragmatic abilities. If the pragmatic aspect of language is relatively ... [more ▼]

Language profile of fragile-X syndrome individuals looks like the one of Down syndrome individuals, except for phonological and pragmatic abilities. If the pragmatic aspect of language is relatively preserve in Down syndrome, it is one of the most impaired language component in fragile-X syndrome. Discourse of fragile X persons generally contains of repetitions, perseverations and stereotypies. These behaviors are well documented in the literature but, we do not know, for now, the reasons of these repetitions and perseverations. Are they the consequence of a real pragmatic disorder or the consequence of motor difficulties ? Another aspect of the pragmatic component of language remains almost unexplored in this pathology : the common ground management and the organization of the old and the new information in conversation. It is this last point that we want to explore. We decided to conduct a preliminary study with four fragile-X boys aged from 6 to 12 years-old. Groups of two boys work together on referential communication tasks. We proposed traditional experimental situations in a non-eye contact condition between participants. We compare the results of our subjects with those of typically developing children matched on the lexical age. Fragile-X boys are less efficient than typically developing children when the message to give or receive contains spatial terms or "ordinal" attributes. They also manage less efficiently with an incomplete message especially when it is given by an adult. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 58 (1 ULg)