Cognitive development refers to the growth and evolution of an individual’s cognitive skills over their lifetime, including reasoning, memory, and language. During childhood, various conditions can impact cognitive development, the prevalence of which appears to have increased since the pandemic. Speech disorders, for instance, have increased by over 100% for children between 0 and 12 years in 2022. Connections to increased screen time during this period have been identified by the thinner cortical thickness in brain areas responsible for language and executive functioning. This increased diagnosis rate is not only important to help understand why children may be struggling to communicate now, but also to investigate how their other cognitive skills may have been affected by these diagnoses.
Speech disorders and their cognitive effects
Speech disorders refer to a variety of conditions that may interrupt one’s ability to communicate clearly. Speech sound disorders (SSDs) typically occur during a child’s formative years and result from neurological disorders, structural abnormalities, or even sensory disorders and refer to persistent errors with perceiving and producing speech sounds.
Early childhood SSDs are associated not only with lower literacy but also higher risks for future persistent speech/language problems and reading disabilities. Not all SSDs have equal effects, though. Those that are outgrown by adolescence (due to typical development, strong cognitive skills, and environmental support) do not have the extreme effects that others do, such as higher rates of language impairment. Therefore, speech correction alone is not enough to correct SSDs. This is especially because some SSDs may indicate deeper developmental problems, highlighting the importance of cognitive and language skills. Another crucial factor to consider is socioeconomic status. Family background determines the level of access to the required resources for treating SSDs, which explains why children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds face worse future outcomes, potentially including lower literacy and language problems.
SSDs not only affect children’s linguistic abilities, but they have also been associated with lower executive functioning, specifically abstraction and cognitive flexibility (the ability to adapt thinking/behaviour in response to new information). Children who have consistent SSDs (error patterns are predictable) tend to perform worse on cognitive tasks and find it more difficult to shift attention between tasks than those without SSDs, and those with inconsistent SSDs (variable and unpredictable errors, such as producing words inconsistently each time). This implies that SSDs reflect broader cognitive challenges, as the affected executive functions – self-control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility – are immensely important for growth, as they allow children to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills.
Cultural Context
The effects of SSDs are not only studied extensively in the West - there is cross-cultural support for their negative effects on cognition. In Russian preschools, speech disorders have close ties to delays in cognitive development. Children with SSDs possessed below-average intellectual abilities, specifically verbal reasoning, visual-motor coordination, and executive and learning functions. These children demonstrated difficulties translating from nonverbal to verbal thinking. This not only has strong implications for academic development, but even social development. In Indian contexts as well, SSDs occurred mostly in pediatric populations, and the majority of the clients came from rural backgrounds. However, while statistics of SSDs in Indian populations are accessible, there is still a lack of research into the cognitive effects of these disorders, something which should be targeted.
Furthermore, research on the difference in SSD effects on bilingual and monolingual children has also been conducted. For instance, an important point is raised - whether difficulties with speech are due to disorders or just differences in the languages spoken. While studying phonemes and phonological patterns in Putonghua-dominant children who also spoke Cantonese, researchers found that the bilingual children showed slower phonological development than monolingual peers. Their Cantonese pronunciation was determined by their dominant language (Putonghua), as both languages share different rules but similar vocabulary. Therefore, while considering how to accurately treat SSDs, it is important to keep in mind bilingual and multilingual children, as confusion between two languages (especially similar ones) can easily be mistaken for disorder, which may have negative consequences.
Shared phonemes, however, might be beneficial in improving not only language proficiency but also in overcoming speech disorders. In bilingual Spanish-English children, this proved to be a strategic intervention method to help tackle SSDs. Shared phonemes in only their first language (Spanish) supported simultaneous growth in both languages. This was due to the shared sounds acting as strong learning cues. This leads to a strong implication that bilingualism should be seen as a potential asset in speech therapy, and should be utilised where possible. However, the previous two studies highlight one important consideration: that this intervention method might only be beneficial in certain contexts, if the two languages are distinct enough not to confuse.
How can we target this?
Early intervention is essential for children with SSDs, but it must go beyond traditional speech therapy (which focuses on correcting speech sound errors through structured practice and repetition). A truly effective approach needs to be multifaceted, which is achieved by targeting not only articulation but also language development, literacy skills, and cognition. Regular cognitive assessments are also critical to gain a full understanding of each child’s developmental profile, so that interventions can be personalised. Moreover, intervention strategies must take into account family background, particularly for children from lower socioeconomic settings. Schools could implement accessible programs to regularly support at-risk children, ensuring that no child is denied the opportunity to overcome these disorders due to social barriers. For bilingual and multilingual children, assessments and treatment plans should also account for cross-linguistic influences. Experts need to differentiate between typical language differences and true speech disorders by using culturally appropriate methods.
To conclude, speech intervention should be comprehensive, inclusive, and individualised so that every child can go on to thrive academically and socially.
Natasha Vashi
