Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-489z4 Total loading time: 0.298 Render date: 2022-05-28T06:33:27.718Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

The use of the Internet in collecting CDI data – an example from Norway*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2012

KRISTIAN E. KRISTOFFERSEN*
Affiliation:
University of Oslo
HANNE GRAM SIMONSEN
Affiliation:
University of Oslo
DORTHE BLESES
Affiliation:
University of Southern Denmark
SONJA WEHBERG
Affiliation:
Odense University Hospital
RUNE NØRGÅRD JØRGENSEN
Affiliation:
University of Southern Denmark
ELI ANNE EIESLAND
Affiliation:
University of Oslo
LAILA YVONNE HENRIKSEN
Affiliation:
University of Oslo
*
Address for correspondence: Kristian E. Kristoffersen, University of Oslo – Department of Linguistics and Scandinavian Studies, P.O. Box 1102 Blindern, Oslo N-0317, Norway. e-mail: k.e.kristoffersen@iln.uio.no

Abstract

This article presents the methodology used in a population-based study of early communicative development in Norwegian children using an adaptation of the MacArthur-Bates communicative development inventories (CDI), comprising approximately 6500 children aged between 0 ; 8 and 3 ; 0. To our knowledge, this is the first CDI study collecting data via the Internet. After a short description of the procedures used in adapting the CDI to Norwegian and the selection of participants, we discuss the advantages and potential pitfalls of using web-based forms as a method of data collection. We found that use of web-based forms was far less time-consuming, and therefore also far less expensive than the traditional paper-based forms. The risk of coding errors was virtually eliminated with this method. We conclude that in a society with high access to the Internet, this is a method well worth pursuing.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

[*]

We thank the CDI Advisory Board for permission to adapt the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Inventories to Norwegian. We also thank Master of linguistics Kristin Wium for drafting the first version of the Norwegian CDI, as well as PhD (linguistics) Janne von Koss Torkildsen, Lars Smith and Stephen von Tetzchner, professors of psychology at the University of Oslo, for evaluating the first draft. Furthermore, we would like to thank the parents of the participating children for having completed the CDI-reports. Finally, we thank the anonymous reviewers of the Journal of Child Language for their useful comments and suggestions. The data collection was funded by the Faculty of Humanities, University of Oslo.

References

Bates, E., Bretherton, I. & Snyder, L. (1988). From first words to grammar: Individual differences and dissociable mechanisms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berglund, E. & Eriksson, M. (2000). Communicative development in Swedish children 16–28 months old: The Swedish early communicative development inventory: Words and Sentences. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 41(2), 133–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bleses, D., Vach, W., Wehberg, S., Faber, K. & Madsen, T. O. (2007). Tidlig kommunikativ udvikling. Odense: Syddansk universitetsforlag.Google Scholar
Bleses, D., Vach, W., Slott, M., Wehberg, S., Thomsen, P., Madsen, T. O. & Basbøll, H. (2008a). The Danish Communicative Developmental Inventories: Validity and main developmental trends. Journal of Child Language 35, 651–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bleses, D., Vach, W., Slott, M., Wehberg, S., Thomsen, P., Madsen, T. O. & Basbøll, H. (2008b). Early vocabulary development in Danish and other languages: A CDI-based comparison. Journal of Child Language 35, 619–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caselli, M. C., Bates, E., Casadio, P., Fenson, J., Fenson, L., Sanderl, L. & Weir, J. (1995). A cross-linguistic study of early lexical development. Cognitive Development 10, 159200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caselli, M. C., Casadio, P. & Bates, E. (1999). A comparison of the transition from first words to grammar in English and Italian. Journal of Child Language 26, 69111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caselli, M. C., Monaco, L., Trasciani, M. & Vicari, S. (2008). Language in Italian children with Down syndrome and with specific language impairment. Neuropsychology 22, 2735.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dale, P. S., Bates, E., Reznick, J. S. & Morisset, C. (1989). The validity of a parent report instrument of child language at twenty months. Journal of Child Language 16, 239–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dale, P. S. & Penfold, M. (2011). Adaptations of the MacArthur-Bates CDI into non-U.S. English languages. 2011(1114). Retrieved from www.sci.sdsu.edu/cdi/documents/AdaptationsSurvey7-5-11Web.pdf.Google Scholar
Devescovi, A., Caselli, M. C., Marchione, D., Pasqualetti, P., Reilly, J. & Bates, E. (2005). A crosslinguistic study of the relationship between grammar and lexical development. Journal of Child Language 32, 759–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eurostat. (2008). Internet access and use in the EU27 in 2008. Retrieved 26 August 2010, from http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=STAT/08/169&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=nl.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S., Bates, E., Thal, D. J., Pethick, S. J., Tomasello, M., Mervis, C. B. & Stiles, J. (1994). Variability in early communicative development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 59(5). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S., Thal, D. J., Bates, E., Hartung, J. P., Pethick, S. & Reilly, J. S. (1993). The MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories: User's guide and technical manual. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Marchman, V. A., Thal, D. J., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S. & Bates, E. (2007). MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories. User's guide and technical manual. Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
Law, J. & Roy, P. (2008). Parental report of infant language skills: A review of the development and application of the Communicative Development Inventories. Child and Adolescent Mental Health 13, 198206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maital, S. L., Dromi, E., Sagi, A. & Bornstein, M. H. (2000). The Hebrew Communicative Development Inventory: Language specific properties and cross-linguistic generalizations. Journal of Child Language 27, 4367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McBride-Chang, C., Tardif, T., Cho, J.-R., Shu, H., Fletcher, P., Stokes, S. F., Wong, A. & Leung, K. (2008). What's in a word? Morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge in three languages. Applied psycholinguistics 29, 437–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meints, K., Plunkett, K. & Harris, P. L. (1999). When does an ostrich become a bird: The role of prototypes in early word comprehension. Developmental Psychology 35, 1072–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reese, E. & Reed, S. (2000). Predictive validity of the New Zealand MacArthur communicative development inventory: Words and sentences. Journal of Child Language 27, 255–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simonsen, H. G. (1990). Barns fonologi: system og variasjon hos tre norske og et samoisk barn. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Statistics Norway (2011). Population Statistics. Estimated population, 1 January 2012. Retrieved from www.ssb.no/english/subjects/02/01/10/folkber_en/.Google Scholar
Tardif, T., Gelman, S. A. & Xu, F. (1999). Putting the ‘noun bias’ in context: A comparison of English and Mandarin. Child Development 70, 620–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thordardottir, E. T. & Ellis Weismer, S. (1996). Language assessment via parent report: Development of a screening instrument for Icelandic children. First Language 16, 265–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The use of the Internet in collecting CDI data – an example from Norway*
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The use of the Internet in collecting CDI data – an example from Norway*
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The use of the Internet in collecting CDI data – an example from Norway*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *