User:Tulsa01/sandbox

Acredolo & Goodwyn's book show the benefits are shown to decrease tears and make family life easier, helps increase vocabulary production and jump starts intellectual and emotional growth. The start of the baby sign campaign came to be and has grown in popularity as courses have been offered to teach parents how to sign to their children. The book encourages signing, explains the benefits of signing, gives how to instructions, introduces ASL, and provides guidance of parents.

Bonvillian & Siedlecki (2000) state that learning sign language, in the form of American Sign Language (ASL) or in the form of baby sign is something that takes place over a long period of time with children, it is not something that develops over a brief interaction between an adult and a child. It is also important to note that there is considerable variation among children with regards to learning ASL or baby sign, with individual struggles with communicating occurring.

Capone & McGregor distinguish the clear difference between symbolic gestures and sign language because parents tend to mistaken the two. They state that symbolic gestures are part of normal language development and facilitate it by evoking joint attention. Sign language on the other hand functions in a similar way in facilitating language development though has the same linguistic properties as spoken language. Therefore sign language is more likely to enhance the communication and language development of the child having be based upon standard linguistic properties that the child will later utilize in spoken language.

Daniels (1994) designed a study to test if expressive and receptive language measures of pre- kindergarten students differed based on whether or not the group received ASL signing classes. It is important to note that all of the participants tested similarly prior to experimentation. The results concluded that pre- kindergarten students who received 25% ASL and 25% english instruction scored significantly higher for both measures. These results are explained by the phenomenon that when the child is acquiring language both by visual and auditory modes they have optimum opportunity to store the signals in their memory.  Also through active participation in learning the signs the process of learning how to communicate becomes more pleasurable to them, thus being stored in the memory at a faster rate.

Fitzpatrick, Thibert, Grandpierre,& Johnstone (2014) evaluated the current literature available on websites by determining if the website information answered the question of if baby sign helps encourage developmental social, cognitive, and language skills, and promotes greater relationship between parent and child. Websites were found by typing in search terms to google scholar and through certain academic databases. Supporting information on websites had to contain specific criteria in order to be considered for the study. All participants had to be under the age of 36 months, baby signs as defined by the commercially advertised baby signs merchandise had to be used, had to be a primary study, the primary measures at the end of the study had to look at the effectiveness of baby sign on receptive and expressive language. After examining all information used on websites only 10 articles met the criteria for further examination. These articles demonstrate that although there is a lot of interest in baby sign there are not many primary studies done describing the benefits of baby sign. Based on the 10 articles examined there is no substantive evidence that baby sign exposure benefits in the language acquisition of children or creates an increased bond between parent and child, there is also however, no information stating that parents should not use it.

Gongora & Farkas (2009) determine if intentionally teaching an infant sign language would have an impact on mother-infant interactions. Both a control and experimental group were monitored during a free play session to assess how the mother-infant interaction was initially. This free play interaction was monitored again two more times within the study as the children aged. After the free play study participants took part in two weekly sessions instructing them on how to use the infant sign program developed by Acredolo and Goodwyn. Infants were all five to nine months at the start of the study and were assessed in home every 15 days until they turned eighteen months old. Data collected from the study contained information on visual, vocal, tactile, and affective interactions between the mother and infant. Results found that in both experimental and control group infants had an increase in the frequency at which they produced visual, vocal, tactile, and affective behaviors but a decrease in the length that they produced each behavior. Infants in the experimental group showed a slightly greater frequency of vocal interaction behavior but not enough to be significant. Tactile behaviors were found to be greater in the experimental group as signing takes more conscious use of their hands which can be transmitted into other actions such as caressing or kissing of the mother.

Goodwyn, Acredolo, & Brown (2000) conducted a longitudinal study of infants from 11- 36 months of age analyzing an experimental “Sign Training” group of which parents encouraged symbolic gestures with their infants. In order to achieve valid results they compared the progress of language acquisition to a control group who received no knowledge of sign training to assist their infants in language acquisition. The use of symbolic gesture from the experimental group had to go beyond typical context cues. The study found that the encouragement of meaningful symbolic gestures facilitated the infants accelerated language acquisition. It is suggested that the gesturing alone does not enhance language development, but rather it encourages more vocalization and contingent interaction. Meaningful baby signs causes the parent to elaborate further on what the infant is communicating leading to further exposure to language and development.

Howlett, Kirk, & Pine (2011) described baby sign as teaching mothers and infants keywords for gestures for objects and concepts. The use of baby sign is thought to create less stress on parents as a result of less infant distress; this is thought to be a result of the potential communication children are able to produce and express themselves through after learning baby sign. Through the use of baby sign, parents are promised benefits with the hopes of acquiring an increased insight on their child’s needs, decrease the level of frustration and stress, and an enhanced positive relationship with the child. Children are claimed to benefit through an increase in IQ, increased vocabulary, increased emotional and intellectual development, and an increase in confidence and self esteem. It is also suggested that gesture does not decrease stress levels, which classes are advertising occurs.

Kirk, Howlett, Pine, & Fletcher (2013) state that baby sign programs encourage mothers to improve communication between themselves and preverbal infants. Kirk et al. (2013) have found that the results of their study provided no support that through learning baby sign, that children’s language development would be benefitted. The study was performed with healthy infants; baby sign has not been found to support, or hinder, the production of regular linguistic outcomes. They found that the children who participated in baby sign had similar language development of those who did not partake in baby sign for language measures within any age range. It was concluded from the study that mothers who used baby sign with their infants encouraged increased independence with them and supported a higher level of autonomy with their child.

Iverson & Goldin- Meadow (2005) conducted a study with 10 children aged 10-24 months and examined if there was a connection between the gestures children make and their ability to produce language. Children were filmed for 30 minutes every month for 8 months and their gesture and speech combinations and patterns were examined. This information was then coded as speech only, gesture only, or speech and gesture to differentiate how the child was communicating. In the beginning months of the study over 9 out of 10  children’s communication consisted mostly of gesture, this decreased however with none of the children using gesture only be the last month of the study. These results support that gesture is used as a stepping stone to help infants identify objects before they can speak. Infants on average were producing a gesture for an object 3 months before they produced the word, demonstrating that gesture is a temporary way to communicate. Furthermore it was found that infants who produced gesture and word together were first to produce two word speech segments. Objects that were first identified in gesture were then first objects to be identified as words, possibly because meanings that are easy to represent help give children a means to practice what they mean and therefore become more fluent in their foundational communication skills.

Mueller & Sepulveda (2013) begin by mentioning the increased popularity of baby sign language in the media and the numerous resources available to assist parents in teaching it. They conducted a study to determine whether or not the assumption was true that baby sign training created increased stress levels among parents. To test this assumption, they designed a workshop to teach the use of baby sign to 9 families and their children. Following the workshop they obtained responses from the parents in regards to the effects the process had on their stress level and their interaction with their child. In focusing on signs that they could incorporate into their daily routine the parents found the workshop to inhibit stress. Many parents reported that learning how to properly sign with their child overall enhanced parent- child communication by reducing frustration, and increasing their bond. The benefits of learning baby sign highly out- weighed the stress of feeling like their baby was not paying attention, which the researches stated was natural.

Nelson, White, & Grewe (2012) conducted a study to identify websites that promote the teaching of sign language to both hearing and non-hearing infants, determine what types of claims are being substantiated as to the benefit of this practice, identify if these claims are supported by research, and evaluate the empirical research, if any, that is supporting the internet claims. Sites were identified by typing ‘baby’, ‘sign-language’, ‘infant’, and ‘gesture’ into the google search engine. Thirty-three websites were found claiming parents would observe greater communication skills, increased parent-child bonding, increased IQ, and fewer tantrums in their infant if using baby sign. After analysing each website a list of eighty two sources of evidence were compiled ranging from journal articles to opinions with everything such as book and newspaper articles in between. Of all this evidence there were only eight empirical articles cited, with five articles being authored by the same two people. There was no evidence cited within the website to support the claims that sign language would reduce tantrums and frustration, increase parent-child bonding or increase the infant’s feelings of self-esteem, satisfaction and accomplishment. However, there is also no evidence to support that it does not benefit the infant. Ultimately, although every website claimed to be substantiated by evidence, over 90% of the information on the site were opinion articles or descriptions of products to help teach baby sign.

Pizer, Walters, & Meier (2007) believe that the visual- gestural signs provided by baby sign play the role of facilitating earlier and richer communication with infants. The hope for clearer communication with their child is the parents initial motivation for choosing to sign. It is also presented that their is a  “coolness” or “hipness” in sign language that is influenced by the media that is now attached to parents signing with their young ones. The goal of the study was to focus less on the effects of signing on cognitive and linguistic development and more so on the way it facilitates social development. The study claims that baby sign could be viewed as a precursor to teaching infants typical ways of thinking and acting in social settings.

Seal and DePaolis (2014) conducted a study with exposure to baby sign with hearing infants. There were two groups in the study, receiving baby sign exposure or not receiving exposure. They found that there were no significant differences with language acquisition or reaching word milestones between these two groups of children. Although there was no support found for utilizing baby sign, they also did not find any negative effects. It is possible that baby sign is working in support of infant vocalizations, but it was not found to facilitate their later spoken development. Gesture is a regular component of infant development and it has been questioned why baby sign is being introduced additionally to this during a child’s development. There is believed to be a large emphasis in the commercial and Internet marketing with motivation to participate in baby sign with your child. It is claimed that your child will have improved literacy, language, and behavioral skills, in addition to increased intelligence because of using baby sign. In opposition to baby sign, it is argued that there may be a cognitive overload for children, that it may compete with spoken language, and an argument from older generations that is their children reached language milestones without this.