Direct vs Indirect Linguistic Cues

Katie Engle

In the context of teaching language, cueing is a strategy used by clinicians to help elicit speech. ASHA (n.d.) includes the understanding of cues as one of the fundamental attributes of effective use of language for communication. Speech Language Pathologists often use two forms of cues when targeting the elicitation of language; direct linguistic cues and indirect linguistic cues. Direct linguistic cues are specific and straightforward whereas indirect cues utilize subtlety and are more conversational and situational (Owens, 2024).

Under the umbrella of direct linguistic cues there are the methods of substitution and mand model. The substitution method is when the clinician makes a statement including a descriptor and requests that the child tell you about the topic (Owens, 2024). The Mand Model, is a direct cueing strategy used after teaching a particular concept. There are four main steps to the process including gaining the child's attention, asking the child what they would like, cue a response (with a model when needed), praising the child for the appropriate response to request (Owens, 2024).

Indirect linguistic cues are used in conversation and require the SLP to make incorrect statements to elicit language. Under indirect cues there are two types of contingencies; ones that require a response and ones that do not. Contingencies requiring a response are utilized when a child is able to produce the word or phrase being targeted, but fails in doing so. These types of contingencies include requests of correction mode, choice-making, error repetition, self-correction, expansion, etc. (Owens, 2024). Contingencies that do not require a response are those that fulfill intention. These include imitations, continuants, expansions, extensions, recast sentences, etc. (Owens, 2024).

Both indirect and direct cues are of importance when attempting to elicit language. As a clinician, providing caregivers with information regarding these methods of cueing is of benefit.

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2022). Language In Brief. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. https://www.asha.org/practice-portal/clinical-topics/spoken-language-disorders/language-in-brief/

Owens, R. E. (2024). Language disorders : a functional approach to assessment and intervention in children. Plural Publishing, Inc.

Focused Stimulation

Erika Hembree

Focused stimulation is an approach an SLP may use to teach a high number of targets in a meaningful context without the child needing to respond. Focused stimulation must be semantically and pragmatically appropriate as it includes self-talk and parallel talk in the stimulation. During focused stimulation, it is important to present the target frequently while ensuring there is little pressure on the child. Owens (2024) included the following example of focused stimulation within a conversational context:

Child: Mommy make hamburgers. Mommy make ‘tator salad.

SLP: She must be a good cook. She made hamburgers and potato salad. And what else. She made . . .

Child: Cake.

SLP: She did? She made a cake. Yummy. Maybe she also made hot dogs?

Child: Uh-huh

SLP: She made a very nice picnic for the family. Did she get to play any games or did she just work?

Owens (2024) designed this conversation to allow the language targets to appear in the initial part of the sentence or in elliptical utterances where shared information is omitted. Targets may also be used at the end of a sentence for working memory and to increase the learning outcome. Owens (2024) provided the following example of a conversational context with the target at the end of a sentence:

Child: I do it.

Adult: What about me?

Child: You too.

Adult: Great. You won’t do it alone. We will. We will do it together.

Child: We do it.

Adult: Yes. We will do it together. We will!

Focused stimulation should be used in the most naturalistic environment for each child while the SLP is modeling or initially teaching the target to the child. Using the target forms in a naturalistic context agrees with social theories of language learning, which assume that language is typically learned within a child's natural social context (Bruinsma et al., 2020).

References:

Owens, R. E. (2024). Language disorders. a functional approach to assessment and intervention in children. Plural Publishing, Inc.

Bruinsma, G., Wijnen, F., & Gerrits, E. (2020). Focused Stimulation Intervention in 4- and 5-Year-Old Children with Developmental Language Disorder: Exploring Implementation in Clinical Practice. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 51(2), 247–269.

Structural Priming

Shelby Alexander

Leonard (2011) explains the language intervention known as structural priming as follows, “the sentences produced by speakers are influenced by the sentences that they had just heard. This influence is seen even when the speakers’ productions do not contain the same words or thematic relations that appeared in the preceding sentence. For example, after hearing a sentence such as 'The man bought the candy for his children,' a speaker is more likely to describe a picture with the sentence 'The girl gave the bicycle to the boy' than with the sentence 'The girl gave the boy the bicycle.' Here, the sentence heard by the speaker is referred to as the 'prime sentence' and the sentence produced by the speaker is the 'target sentence.' Of special note is the fact that, in this example, the speaker’s description of the picture (the target sentence) has the same syntactic structure as the prime sentence, yet the nouns, the verb, and even the preposition differ from those that appeared in the prime sentence "(p. 1).

There have been many studies done on the effects of structural priming on children. Owens (2024) states that the effectiveness of this method of language intervention can depend on the child's age, and that priming occurs in 4-year olds after only listening to the prime sentence, whereas a 3-year old needs to imitate the prime sentence first, and the prime and target sentences need to share similar nouns or verbs before priming occurs. The evidence from the studies indicate that structural priming does affect how children use language and can inform their grammar development.

Leonard, L. B. (2011). The primacy of priming in grammatical learning and intervention: A tutorial. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54(2), 608-621.

Owens, R. E. (2024). Language disorders : a functional approach to assessment and intervention in children. Plural Publishing, Inc.

Mand-Model

Shiri Leitman

Owens 2024 discusses one of the variations of a direct linguistic cue, the mand model, which has been used successfully with preschoolers and children with DLD to teach new language skills. The mand model is a procedure that follows a structured routine that is set up before engaging in an activity. The mand model teaching process has four steps, an adult first captures the child's attention by offering various engaging material, ensuring there is shared attention between the child and the adult. The second step, after the child demonstrates interest, the adult prompts the child with phrases like "tell me about this" or "tell me what you want," encouraging the child to use the previously learned language. If the child does not respond, the adult goes to step three, where they either prompt the child for a response or model the desired behavior for imitation, with the final step being the adult praising the child for providing an appropriate response and give them the item (Owens, 2024).

Hawkins and Schuster 2007 investigated the effectiveness of the mand-model procedure on teaching speech sounds to pre-school aged children. The researcher began intervention with a storybook where he would engage the child's attention with engaging pictures, then prompting the child to respond to different targets, such as asking "what is that?" while pointing to the picture with the target sound. If the child did not respond correctly, the researcher provided an exaggerated model of the correct sound, where the child was encouraged to imitate, and if produced correctly were praised. The results were successful for three out of the four children selected to participate, and each of these children achieved at least 80% accuracy in producing the target initial /l/ sound after intervention. The results of the study demonstrated a significant improvement in the children's speech, and also demonstrated maintenance of correct sound production during follow-up sessions, as well as generalization of the /l/ sound in different settings (Hawkins & Schuster, 2007).

Hawkins, S. R., & Schuster, J. W. (2007). Using a Mand-Model Procedure to Teach Preschool Children Initial Speech Sounds. Journal of Developmental & Physical Disabilities, 19(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-006-9032-6

Owens, R. E. (2024). Language disorders : a functional approach to assessment and intervention in children. Plural Publishing, Inc.

References:

Owens, R. E. (1991). Language Disorders: A Functional Approach to Assessment and intervention. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BB08522769

Endicott, K., & Higbee, T. S. (2007). Contriving motivating operations to evoke mands for information in preschoolers with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 1(3), 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2006.10.003

‌

Using Non-Linguistic Context to Elicit Requests

By Skylar Stringer

The manipulation of non-linguistic context in language therapy can contribute to a more naturalistic and generalizable way of learning language (Owens, 1991). This can also be thought of as environmental manipulation. One effective way of using this method is through the use of delays (Owens, 1991). Delays can be used to initiate requests through identifying items or activities that are highly motivating for the child and waiting a moment. If the child is motivated for the item or activity, this will give them the opportunity to practice requesting. For example, a child who is highly motivated to color could be given a peice of paper with no crayons. The clinician does not deny access to the preferred item, but rather they delay giving the item. This delay gives the child an opportunity to practice functionally communicating by requesting for the item or activity. If they do not independently request, the clinician can model an appropriate request. Differential reinforcement can be used in this scenario, by giving more of the requested item when the child functionally communicates (e.g. more crayons, more bubbles, etc.), and slightly less when the request is prompted.

Endicott and Higbee (2007) investigated methods of teaching preschoolers with ASD to ask "where" and "who" questions. The clinicians hid a preferred item to teach "where". After "where" was mastered, the clinicians gave preferred items to specific people (participants did not know who had the item) to teach "who" question. All of the participants in this study successfully learned to ask these questions (Endicott & Higbee, 2007). This suggests that manipulating the environment can be effective in teaching children with ASD how to request for information.

Top-Down Teaching

Video by: Benay Rose

References

Kahn, R. (2022, January 6). Bottom-up and Top-down Teaching. Landmark Outreach. https://www.landmarkoutreach.org/blog-post/bottom-up-top-down/

Owens, R. E. (2024). Language disorders. a functional approach to assessment and intervention in children. Plural Publishing, Inc.

Modeling Techniques for Children with ASD

by Alexis Tavakoli

Modeling is a valuable language teaching technique that can be used with very many populations and treatment scenarios. Modeling is the process of a clinician producing the expressive language that the child is to produce before instructing the child to do it. When working with children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), modelling can be crucial when trying to engage them in the treatment. Since engagement can be different with this population, it is important to take these details into account.

One strategy that can be implemented during treatment is the question of whether or not the activity that you are presenting to the child is irresistible to them. Meaning, will it capture the child’s attention and sustain it enough to be able to teach them the skills noted in their goals. If a clinician shows their excitement for the activity, it can spark curiosity in the child and make it “their idea” to participate in the activity. For example, if a child does not want to participate in any activity you can tell them “I’m going to do it by myself then” and begin the activity until the child becomes interested and joins. Another modeling strategy that is helpful for children with ASD is the use of video modelling. This provides them with multiple points of view of a scenario or a more digestible form of instruction. Lastly, an important key to modelling is to show that it is okay to make mistakes. Modelling is not about perfection, it is about learning, and part of the learning process, is learning from your mistakes.

Gavin, L. (2019, March 18). Modeling: A Super-Strategy for Language Growth. LG Speech Therapy. https://www.lgspeechtherapy.com/blog/2019/3/18/modeling-a-super-strategy-for-language-growth

Media (2000), M. (2017, October 11). How to use modelling to engage pupils with autism. Teach Primary. https://www.teachprimary.com/learning_resources/view/use-modelling-to-engage-pupils-with-autism

By: Laura Beth Leddy

References:

Ebbels, S. (n.d.) A Visual Way to Teach Spoken and Written Grammar. shapecoding.com Retrieved on March 17, 2025 from https://shapecoding.com/

Finestack L. H. (2018). Evaluation of an Explicit Intervention to Teach Novel Grammatical Forms to Children With Developmental Language Disorder. Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 61(8), 2062–2075. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-17-0339

the Informed SLP. (n.d.) STOP! It’s Grammar Time (Explicit) theInformedSLP.com Retrieved on March 17, 2025 from https://www.theinformedslp.com/review/stop-its-grammar-time-explicit

Owens, R. E. (2024). Language disorders : a functional approach to assessment and intervention in children. Plural Publishing, Inc.

Exposure to Grammatical Targets

Rebecca Cottrell

The Input Informativeness Approach involves "toy talk" where parents are encouraged to discuss the toy the child is playing with. An example would be "Barbie is going to the pool. She gets in her car and drives to the pool. She might need a towel to dry off when she is done." This is a way to share contextual information around a certain subject. The parent just taught the child that a towel dries you off after swimming. Children build connections this way, transferring the information to other contexts. So, the child might say "I use a towel to dry off after my bath." The more informative conversation the parent provides, the more the child learn, connects, and builds vocabulary. Hadley & Walsh (2014) found that toy talk increases grammar ability in young language learners specifically improving the richness of tense/agreement marking in language input.

The Competing Sources of Input Approach requires a specific presentation of morphemes being taught while avoiding input utterances. Emphasis is placed on relative frequency avoiding certain exceptions. The most frequent morphological errors are omissions. It is easy to confuse the placement of auxiliary verbs and pronouns around a verb, specifically rewording a question into a statement. The CSI approach aids in grammatical placement.

The High Variability Approach places emphasis on the way morpheme use is influenced by other details in the sentence. This approach can aid in lexical tone perception. The approach uses varying tones to help the child understand that different meanings can be behind the same sentence if spoken differently.

Hadley, P. A. & Walsh, K. M. (2014). Toy Talk: Simple Strategies to Create Richer Grammatical Input. Language, speech, and hearing services in schools. 45(3), 159-172.

Owens, R. E. (2024). Language disorders. a functional approach to assessment and intervention in children. Plural Publishing, Inc.

Page updated

Report abuse