Vergleich der effektivität von artikulatorischer vs. phonologischer therapie in der behandlung kindlicher phonologischer störungen: Eine pilotstudie

Dodd's (1995) psycholinguistic classification system for speech disorders in children describes four different subgroups of speech disorders. A number of studies have shown that for each subgroup a specific underlying deficit in the speech processing chain can be described (Dodd et al. 1989; Bradford & Dodd, 1994; Dodd & McCormack, 1995; Bradford & Dodd, 1996). Further studies (e.g. Dodd & Bradford, 2000) have demonstrated how only intervention that focuses on the specific underlying deficit provides successful remediation of the problem. In Germany, 'traditional articulation therapy' is still the most widely used intervention method when working with children with any type of speech disorder. However, studies on English-speaking children have shown that children with a consistent phonological disorder (Dodd, 1995), who's speech problems are suggested to arise from an underlying cognitive-linguistic deficit, benefit only from a phonologically oriented approach but not from a motor-based approach (e.g. Dodd & Bradford, 2000). The issue for the present four single case-studies was whether this also was true for German-speaking children diagnosed with a consistent phonological disorder. Two children (aged 3;11 and 4;2 years) received 16 sessions of phonological intervention, while two more children (aged 3;10 and 4;2 years) received an articulatory intervention for the same period of time. The results of these four single cases were compared. This comparison can cautiously be viewed as indicating that children treated with a phonological intervention program show better progress in terms of the percentage of consonants correct and the successful remediation of age-inappropriate or idiosyncratic phonological processes.