Intensity in phonological intervention: Is there a prescribed amount?

References

• Allen, M. M. (in press). Treatment efficacy and intensity for children with speech sound disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,
   Google Scholar
• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1985). Guidelines for identification audiometry. Asha, 27, 49–52.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, E. (2012). Optimal intervention intensity. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14, 401–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker, E., & McLeod, S. 2011. Evidence based practice for children with speech sound disorders: Part I narrative review. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42, 102–139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowen, C. 2010. Parents and children together. In A. L. Williams, S. McLeod, & R. J. McCauley (Eds.), Interventions for speech sound disorders in children (pp. 407–426). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Culatta, B., & Horn, D. 1982. A program for achieving generalization of grammatical rules to spontaneous discourse. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 47, 174–180.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Third Edition (PPVT-III). Circle Pines, MN: Academic Guidance Service.
   Google Scholar
• Gierut, J. A. 1998. Treatment efficacy: Functional phonological disorders in children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, S85–S100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gierut, J. A., Elbert, M., & Dinnsen, D. A. 1987. A functional analysis of phonological knowledge and generalization learning in misarticulating children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30, 462–479.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goldman, R., & Fristoe, M. 1986. Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
   Google Scholar
• Kamhi, A. G. 2006. Treatment decisions for children with speech-sound disorders. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 37, 271–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law, J., Garrett, Z., & Nye, C. 2004. The efficacy of treatment for children with developmental speech and language delay/disorder: A meta-analysis. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 924–943.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schooling, T., Venediktov, R., & Leech, H. 2010. Evidence-based systematic review: Effects of service delivery on the speech and language skills of children from birth to 5 years of age. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
   Google Scholar
• Warren, S. F., Fey, M. E., & Yoder, P. J. 2007. Differential treatment intensity research: A missing link to creating optimally effective communication interventions. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13, 70–77.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weiner, F. F. 1981. Treatment of phonological disability using the method of meaningful minimal contrasts: Two case studies. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 46, 97–103.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams, A. L. 1991. Generalization patterns associated with training least phonological knowledge. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 722–733.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams, A. L. 1993. Phonological reorganization: A qualitative measure of phonological improvement. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 2, 44–51.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, A. L. (2000a). Multiple oppositions: Theoretical foundations for an alternative contrastive intervention approach. American Journal of Speech–Language Pathology, 9, 282–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, A. L. (2000b). Multiple oppositions: Case studies of variables in phonological intervention. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 289–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, A. L. 2003. Speech disorders resource guide in preschool children. Clifton Park, NY: Thomson Delmar Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, A. L. 2005. Assessment, target selection, and intervention: Dynamic interactions within a systemic perspective. Topics in Language Disorders, 25, 231–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, A. L. (2006a). A systemic perspective for assessment and intervention: A case study. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 245–256.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, A. L. (2006b). SCIP: Sound Contrasts in Phonology [version 1]. Greenville, SC: Thinking Publications Division of Super Duper Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, A. L. 2010. Multiple oppositions intervention. In A. L. Williams, S. McLeod, & R. J. McCauley (Eds.), Interventions for speech sound disorders in children (pp. 73–94). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
   Google Scholar