A core diagnostic criterion of Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), and the first symptom usually noticed by parents, is a deficit in or difficulty with language. Previous studies report mixed results on the possible relationship between motor and language issues within children with ASD. Specifically, Kim (2008) studied children with ASD and found no correlation between crawling and later language usage nor was babbling associated with gross or fine motor development. However, Luyster, Kadlec, Carter, and Tager-Flusberg (2008) found the use of gestures to be a significant predictor of receptive language. Also, the use of gestures and imitation significantly predicted expressive language. This current study is an extension of a previous study, now utilizing a doubled sample size and additional variables of interest, including the children’s age at language evaluation and cognitive scores.
Objectives:
To examine the receptive and expressive language profiles in children with and without ASD
To determine the relationship between language abilities and fine motor abilities in children with and without ASD
Methods:
Children are referred to an interdisciplinary tertiary clinic to be evaluated for ASD as well as other developmental disabilities. Children who received the PLS-3 or PLS-4 (a language abilities assessment instrument) and the PDMS-2 (a motor abilities assessment instrument) were included in the analyses. There were N = 43 children in the ASD group and N = 42 children in the non-ASD group.
Results:
Preliminary analyses suggest that expressive language (M = 61.07) surpasses receptive language (M = 57.26) in children with ASD, t (41) = 2.55, p < .05. This was not true for the non-ASD group (p = ns). Furthermore, fine motor abilities were predictive of expressive language in ASD, F (4, 27) = 4.61, p < .01, β = .46 and of receptive language in ASD, F (4, 28) = 3.05, p < .05, β = .49. Again, this predictive relationship was not present in the non-ASD group (both p’s = ns). Also, there was no significant difference between the ASD group and the non-ASD group concerning age at language evaluation, gender, ethnicity, or cognitive scores (all p’s = ns).
Conclusions:
These results have potential to greatly impact the identification and treatment of children with ASD. This language and motor profile seems to be unique to children with ASD and is not seen in our comparison group. It should be noted that our comparison group was comprised entirely of children who were suspected of ASD (but ultimately did not meet diagnostic criteria), and many of which were ultimately diagnosed with another developmental disorders. However, even these children did not display this language profile. Furthermore, fine motor skills were only predictive of receptive language and of expressive language in our ASD group. Thus, the relationship between motor and language abilities also seems to be unique to ASD. If this result is replicated, then future research regarding treatment considerations follow. Specifically, it should be examined whether fine motor interventions can lead to improvements in language abilities in children with ASD.
See more of: Core Symptoms
See more of: Symptoms, Diagnosis & Phenotype