Jennifer Ganger’s article on twin language capabilities compared with singletons of the same age provides insight into the common belief amongst psychologist that twins are at a disadvantage in language development. Ganger summarizes several studies that are used in determining this assumption. She points out flaws in the experiments themselves. Although she points out that there is evidence to support twins are at greater risk of having language problems, there is nothing that is concrete about any of the experiments in her opinion.
Ganger produces several case studies on the subject of twin language. Twin development versus singleton development has been studied since at least the early 20th century according to Ganger. She summarizes these early studies have problems with unintentional biases towards the twins.
The first two studies analyzed were Day and Davis. The Day Study concentrated on early childhood development, while The Davis Study focused on children from age five to nine. The Day study concluded that twins are likely to be up two years behind children without a twin. The Davis study, which was essentially the same study with older children, concluded the language deficiencies were almost always corrected around the age of five to nine. However, twins in the five to nine age groups were still more likely to have articulation problems. There were a few problems with these studies according to Ganger. One of the biggest problems was the twins studied were not always studied separately. This would skew the results, because the singleton children tested were alone. A few other problems were found and tested in other studies. Other issues that were not taken into account were birth weight, order of birth, time of gestation. These problems directly correlate to learning in all children.
Ganger shows more recent studies have concluded that there are a number of problem with the idea that twins will have language issues simple because they are twins. These more recent studies take into account the weight of the children at birth, the order of their birth, and the gestation period. Researchers took these problems into consideration and found evidence to support the theory that twins are more likely to lack their peers in language development. These studies found the cause of this problem is not simply because twins are born at the same time to the same mother, but the factors that causes slower development in children is usually present in a household with twins. For instance, twins have to share time speaking with adults. This gives the individual twin less time developing language skills. Twins also have a smaller birth rate than singleton children, which is a factor that causes slower development. The cause of a twin’s slower development is not by the presence of another, but the factors the other twin can bring.
The article concludes with a reminder that these tests are averages and do not doom people who are twins. There are many factors that can account for language delays. The language development of twins can be greatly influenced by the parents or guardians. Granger reminds her readers that nothing is concrete or exact in this type of study.
(by: Josh Evans)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't know if I agree that twins have more problems with language and articulation. As Ganger pointed out, many of the case studies they did were biased. I grew up with twins and they didn't have any trouble developing their language. I can understand that being with someone of the same age while both of you are simultaneously learning the language, you might not feel as though you need to progress as fast. However, it seems like all children do this when other children are around because they understand each other. When children are at that same developmental level they're going to take short cuts with language because they don't know how to properly speak yet.
ReplyDeleteI don't necessarily agree that ALL twins have more language development problems than a singleton child, but I think that many twins do. Although the studies contained several flaws, research of birth weight and birth order could easily determine whether or not a child will have delays. A baby with a lower birth weight is more likely to struggle from developmental problems than a child who came into the world at a normal birth weight. The same goes for birth order. I went to high school with a pair of twins that this problem had occured to. The oldest twin, or the one that came out first, had received the most nutrients while in the womb. He grew to be tall, good-looking, and smart. The twin that preceded him was short, had a crooked neck, and learned slower than his brother. Research and support back many of these facts up. Also, most twins have a certain "sense" where they can read their twin very well. I feel that some twins may lack progression in order to stay back developmentally with their other twin. But, it could go the other way as well. A twin may be able to push his or her other twin in order to catch that twin up. Also, I do not necessarily agree with the fact that twins have to split language time with adults. Unless the twins are raised in a single parent household, there are always two parents available.
ReplyDeleteSparta had an elementary grade that contained seven sets of twins. Some of those twins moved away before reaching high school, so I am not sure how many sets were still enrolled when this class graduated 2-3 years ago. Two girls were excellent students with no visible communications problems. There were two boys who were exceptional athletes and had a high comfort level speaking and joking with not only their classmates, but also adults. I do not recall anything exceptional about the other twins. Most of my experience with twins is anecdotal, so it is difficult to assess the results of these studies. However, the factors cited just from having another other in a family (lower birth weight, less face time with parents, etc.) do seem as though they would offer plausible causes for slower language development. There are a lot of myths surrounding twins, such as instances perceived as telepathic connections. It is interesting, as Ganger pointed out, that some of the studies were flawed simply because researchers did not factor in that twins represented two different people, skewering comparisons with singletons. Ganger seemed to have more respect for the results of the later studies and the premise that supported identifiable developmental problems with twins.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree that every set of twins will have a language/articulations problem but I do believe that it is more common in twins. Although the testing is biased, the points presented seem very logical. Children with low birth weights tend to have a great disadvantage with development than children of average birth weights and twins obviously fall into that category considering there is more than one in the womb at the same time; however it is true that this isn't always the case. Growing up, I knew 2 different sets of twins and each set of twins DID have an articulation problem at an early age. It was usually more severe in the less outgoing twin. I would assume that like the study of 'sharing speaking time with the parents' is somewhat accurate. Another interesting aspect is that one of the sets of twins did not really speak at all until they were 5. Up to this point they seemed to have a secret spoken language between them like piglatin or something. To prove that twins learn at a slower pace would take many MANY intensive studies because every individual (even twins) is different and NUMEROUS differences (factors) within that individual's life can effect the outcome.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that Ganger is necessarily trying to state that ALL or MOST twins will have language problems. I think she's just trying to observe reasons why the twins are at a higher risk for language development issues. I tend to compare it to smoking-- not every smoker WILL succumb to lung cancer, but smoking poses them at a much higher risk.
ReplyDeleteWith that said, I have identical twin male cousins, and they never had any communication problems that I was aware of. Once again, it just proves that they are at a higher risk; it is not positive they will have these issues.
I thought Ganger's research was very interesting. The fact that the twins were tested as one entity and, as a result, skewed the results was very intriguing. The points she brings up about low birth weight and shared communication time are plausible explanations to me. Low birth weight can cause a child to be developmentally behind in many ways. However, it's just as Ganger said-- development can also be heavily dependent on the parents, so twins definitely aren't doomed to language development issues.
I agree with Abby that Ganger is just saying twins are at a higher risk for communication problems. My best friend's sisters are twins. They are very smart and I have never observed any kind of language development problems. However, there is a set of twin boys in my sister's class that have quite a few learning disabilities. I think that twins' learning abilities are very similar to singletons- it depends on the "individual" learner. Some sets of twins may have an issue with communication or other learning disabilities while others may have a lot. I don't agree with Ganger that twins' language skills aren't able to develop properly because they have to share speaking time with their parents. I've always heard that one of the benefits of having a twin is always having someone to talk to. While the children are learning communication skills, they can always help each other.
ReplyDeleteI understand that some twins have problems with language development but I don't agree that it occurs in every set of twins. I have twin sisters that are younger than me and they did have their struggles with language but they worked through it and one works for her school newspaper. I also understand why twins are at a higher risk because of the shared interaction with their parents. This is the best reason in my eyes on why twins would have communication problems early on in their life.
ReplyDeleteI had no idea before reading this that twins had language development issues at all. From reading this, I would assume that probably some of the studies Ganger talks about are biased. I'd tend to believe now that twins would be more likely to have language problems than a non-twin, but I bet a good number don't. I guess the explaination of the split interaction with parents is an explanation, but how plausible that is for creating serious language issues remains questionable to me.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Zach on this one, I wouldn't have noticed that twins had language development issues , I would think that single kids would have language issues more than twins would. The reason why I say this is that twins are actually "glorified" in a household simply because they are twins, thus making the household/family to pay the twins closer attention because of their amazement by the fact they are twins . I commend Jennifer Ganger on her attempt to fix the studies on twins language development versus single children development, but the question is how reliable are her studies?
ReplyDeleteBefore reading this article, I also did not know that twins had problems with language. My sister-in-law's twin brothers have speech problems but I always just thought it was for other reasons. It makes sense now. I also agree with what Zach said about how a good number of twins probably do not have development problems. I would think that the parents would want them both to succeed equally to prevent jealousy, so they would work extra hard with each child. However, I could also see them devoting more time to one over the other.
ReplyDeleteIt makes sense that twins would have troubles with language. One of the most important times in a child's life for learning language is at a young age, and if the child has to share speaking time with the parents instead of getting all of the attention, then that would cause a slowing of language development. Also, because twins are born smaller than single babies most of the time, that can also have an effect. I had never really thought about it, but this article does make sense.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Abby. The author is not trying to say that all twins will have a problem with language, but the are at a higher risk. I have never personally seen a set of twins that experienced language problems but that doesn't mean that just because I haven't seen it personally that they are not at a higher risk. The research was very interesting especially when Ganger mentioned the development of twins considering low birth weight. Low birth weight maybe plays a small role but the development with the help of parents plays an even bigger one.
ReplyDeleteI think that twins can learn at the same rate as everyone else. If there was in fact some reason for why one twin could not retain the language or learn it properly, genetics would make the other twin susceptible in have the same problem. However, that problem may not even occur at the same time because even though they are twins sometimes things do happen at a different rate. Although, looking at the other side of things there are twins that only one may have a learning problem and one may not. I think genetics is a huge factors but also the individual. They do not think and process information the same exact way even thought they are twins.
ReplyDelete