Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2023-6
Silent Finns and Talkative Italians? An investigation of communicative differences and similarities as perceived by parents in typically developing children
Effective communication is a fundamental aspect of children’s daily living, enabling interaction with adults and peers. A rich literature suggests that communicative abilities develop with age, while little is known about cross-cultural differences and similarities. This study presents a comparison of the communicative performance of Finnish (n = 147) and Italian (n = 147) typically developing children, aged 4–8 years old, as assessed by the widely used Children’s Communication Checklist–2 (CCC-2). The results reveal an effect of nationality in 9 of the 10 subscales. Finnish parents scored their children’s communicative skill higher than Italian parents in eight of those subscales, but for the social relation subscale, Italian parents scored their children higher than the Finnish parents. Some of these differences are evident for the different age groups and are already present at early developmental stages. In both the Finnish and Italian samples, the parents rated the girls’ communicative performance as more competent than the boys’ on a number of CCC-2 subscales. The results are discussed in light of previous evidence highlighting that cultural features affect and shape communicative style within society, leading to differences (and similarities) that should be considered when assessing children’s communicative abilities.
AgliatiA.VescovoA.AnolliL. (2005). Conversation Patterns in Icelandic and Italian People: Similarities and differences in rhythm and accommodation. In AnolliL.DuncanS.MagnussonM. S.RivaG. (Eds.), The hidden structure of interaction: From neurons to culture patterns (pp. 223–235). IOS Press.
2.
Andrés-RoquetaC.Garcia-MolinaI.Flores-BuilsR. (2021). Association between CCC-2 and structural language, pragmatics, social cognition, and executive functions in children with developmental language disorder. Children, 8(2), 123. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8020123
3.
AngeleriR.BoscoF. M.GabbatoreI.BaraB. G.SaccoK. (2012). Assessment battery for communication (ABaCo): Normative data. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 845–861. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0174-9
4.
AngeleriR.GabbatoreI.BoscoF. M.SaccoK.ColleL. (2016). Pragmatic abilities in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: A study with the ABaCo battery. Minerva Psichiatrica, 57(3), 93–103.
5.
AshA. C.RedmondS. M.TimlerG. R.KeanJ. (2017). The influence of scale structure and sex on parental reports of children’s social (pragmatic) communication symptoms. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 31(4), 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2016.1257655
6.
BaraB. G. (2010). Cognitive Pragmatics. The Mental Processes of Communication.
7.
BauerD.GoldfieldB.ReznickJ. (2002). Alternative approaches to analyzing individual differences in the rate of early vocabulary development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23(3), 313–335. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716402003016
8.
BishopD. V. M. (1997). Uncommon understanding: Development and disorders of language comprehension in children. Psychology Press.
9.
BishopD. V. M. (2003). The Children’s Communication Checklist. Second edition. CCC-2 Manual. Pearson.
10.
BishopD. V. M. (2015). The Children’s Communication Checklist-2 (CCC-2), Lasten kommunikointitaitojen kysely, toinen painos (YlihervaA.LoukusaS.VäisänenR, Trans.), Hogrefe Psykologien Kustannus Oy.
11.
BoscoF. M.AngeleriR.ColleL.SaccoK.BaraB. G. (2013). Communicative abilities in children: An assessment through different phenomena and expressive means. Journal of Child Language, 40(4), 741–778. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000913000081
12.
BishopD. V. M.BairdG. (2001). Parent and teacher report of pragmatic aspects of communication: Use of the Children’s Communication Checklist in a clinical setting. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 43(12), 809–818.
13.
BoscoF. M.AngeleriR.ZuffranieriM.BaraB. G.SaccoK. (2012). Assessment Battery for Communication: Development of two equivalent forms. Journal of Communication Disorders, 45(4), 290–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2012.03.002
14.
BoscoF. M.BucciarelliM.BaraB. G. (2004). The fundamental context categories in understanding communicative intention. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(3), 467–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00055-9
15.
BoscoF. M.GabbatoreI. (2017a). Sincere, deceitful, and ironic communicative acts and the role of the theory of mind in childhood. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00021
16.
BoscoF. M.GabbatoreI. (2017b). Theory of mind in recognizing and recovering communicative failures. Applied Psycholinguistics, 38(1), 57–88. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716416000047
17.
BoxerD. (1993). Complaints as positive strategies: What the learner needs to know. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 277–299. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587147
18.
CohenA. D.OlshtainE. (1993). The production of speech acts by EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 33–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586950
19.
CollettaJ. M.GuidettiM.CapirciO.CristilliC.DemirO. E.Kunene-NicolasR. M.LevineS. (2015). Effects of age and language on co-speech gesture production: An investigation of French, American, and Italian children’s narratives. Journal of Child Language, 42(1), 122–145. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000913000585
20.
CollinsA.LocktonE.AdamsC. (2014). Metapragmatic explicitation ability in children with typical language development: Development and validation of a novel clinical assessment. Journal of Communication Disorders, 52, 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.07.001
21.
Conti-RamsdenG.BottingN. (2004). Social difficulties and victimization in children with SLI at 11 years of age. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47(1), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2004/013)
22.
CostaV. D.HarsányiE.Martins-ReisV. O.KummerA. (2013). Translation and cross-cultural adaptation into Brazilian Portuguese of the Children’s Communication Checklist-2. Codas, 25(2), 115–119.
23.
Di SanoS.SagginoA.BarbieriM. S.SurianL. (2013). Children’s Communication Checklist (Second Edition Versione Italiana). Giunti OS Organizzazioni Speciali.
24.
EdwardsD.MercerN. (1986). Context and continuity: Classroom discourse and the development of shared knowledge. In DurkinK. (Ed.), Language development in the school years (pp. 172–202). Croom Helm.
25.
EtchellA.AdhikariA.WeinbergL. S.ChooA. L.GarnettE. O.ChowH. M.ChangS. E. (2018). A systematic literature review of sex differences in childhood language and brain development. Neuropsychologia, 114, 19–31.
26.
FeyM. E.CattsH. W.Proctor-WilliamsK.TomblinJ. B.ZhangX. (2004). Oral and written story composition skills of children with language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing, 47(6), 1301–1318. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2004/098)
27.
FukushimaS.SifianouM. (2017). Conceptualizing politeness in Japanese and Greek. Intercultural Pragmatics, 14(4), 525–555. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0024
28.
GabbatoreI.BoscoF. M.MäkinenL.EbelingH.HurtigT.LoukusaS. (2019). Investigating pragmatic abilities in young Finnish adults using the Assessment Battery for Communication. Intercultural Pragmatics, 16(1), 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2019-0002
29.
GabbatoreI.BoscoF. M.MäkinenL.LeinonenE.LoukusaS. (2021). Social-pragmatic contextual comprehension in Italian preschool and school-aged children: A study using the Pragma test. Intercultural Pragmatics, 18(2), 131–162. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2021-2001
30.
GabbatoreI.LongobardiC.BoscoF. M. (2022). Improvement of communicative-pragmatic ability in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: The adapted version of the cognitive pragmatic treatment. Language Learning and Development, 18(1), 62–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2021.1924177
31.
GertnerB. L.RiceM. L.HadleyP. A. (1994). Influence of communicative competence on peer preferences in a preschool classroom. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 37(4), 913–923. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3704.913
32.
GeurtsH. M.HartmanC.VertéS.OosterlaanJ.RoeyersH.SergeantJ. A. (2009). Pragmatics fragmented: The factor structure of the Dutch Children’s Communication Checklist (CCC). International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 44(5), 549–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/13682820802243344
33.
GibbsR. W.ColstonH. I. (2012). Interpreting figurative meaning. Cambridge University Press.
34.
GlumbićN.BrojčinB. (2012). Factor structure of the Serbian version of the Children’s Communication Checklist-2. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33(5), 1352–1359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.03.010
35.
HatzithomasL.ZotosY.BoutsoukiC. (2011). Humor and cultural values in print advertising: A cross-cultural study. International Marketing Review, 28(1), 57–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651331111107107
36.
HellandW. A.BiringerE.HellandT.HeimannM. (2009). The usability of a Norwegian adaptation of the Children’s Communication Checklist Second Edition (CCC-2) in differentiating between language impaired and non-language impaired 6- to 12-year-olds. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 50(3), 287–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00718.x
37.
HilviuD.ParolaA.VivaldoS.DiLisiD.ConsolinoP.BoscoF. M. (2021). Children with hearing impairment and early cochlear implant: A pragmatic assessment. Heliyon, 7(7), e07428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07428
38.
HuttunenK. H.PineK. J. (2012). Communication culture and gesture use. In ToyotaJ.HallonstenP.ShchepetuninaM. (Eds.), Sense of emptiness: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 94–111). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
39.
HuttunenK. H.PineK. J.ThurnhamA. J.KhanC. (2013). The changing role of gesture in linguistic development: A developmental trajectory and a cross-cultural comparison between British and Finnish children. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 42(1), 81–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-012-9205-7
40.
IversonJ. M.CapirciO.VolterraV.Goldin-MeadowS. (2008). Learning to talk in a gesture-rich world: Early communication in Italian vs. American children. First Language, 28(2), 164–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723707087736
41.
JokinenK.WilcockG. (2006). Contextual inferences in intercultural communication. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 19, 291–300.
42.
JussilaK.Kuusikko-GauffinS.MattilaM. L.LoukusaS.Pollock-WurmanR.JoskittL.EbelingH.MoilanenI.PaulsD.HurtigT. (2015). Cross-cultural differences in the Parent Rated Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS)? Evaluation of the Finnish version among high-functioning school aged males with and without autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 9, 38–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2014.09.008
43.
KamioY.InadaN.MoriwakiA.KurodaM.KoyamaT.TsujiiH.KawakuboY.KuwabaraH.TsuchiyaK. J.UnoY.ConstantinoJ. N. (2013). Quantitative autistic traits ascertained in a national survey of Japanese schoolchildren. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavia, 128(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.12034
44.
KendonA. (2004a). Contrasts in gesticulation: A Neapolitan speaker and a British speaker compared. In MullerC.PosnerR. (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics of everyday gestures (pp. 173–193). Weidler Buchverlag.
45.
KendonA. (2004b). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press.
46.
KetelaarsM. P.CuperusJ.JansoniusK.VerhoevenL. (2010). Pragmatic language impairment and associated behavioural problems. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 45(2), 204–214. https://doi.org/10.3109/13682820902863090
47.
KüntayA. C.NakamuraK.Ateş-ŞenB. (2014). Crosslinguistic and crosscultural approaches to pragmatic development. In MatthewsD. (Ed.), Pragmatic development in first language acquisition (pp. 317–341). John Benjamins.
LamY. G.YeungS. (2012). Towards a convergent account of pragmatic language deficits in children with high-functioning autism: Depicting the phenotype using the pragmatic rating scale. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6(2), 792–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2011.08.004
50.
LawJ.RushR.McBeanK. (2014). The relative roles played by structural and pragmatic language skills in relation to behaviour in a population of primary school children from socially disadvantaged backgrounds. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 19(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2013.854960
51.
LehtonenJ.SajavaaraK. (1985). The silent Finn. In TannenD.Saville-TroikeM. (Eds.), Perspectives on silence (pp. 193–201). Ablex.
52.
LevinsonS. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.
53.
LloydP.CamaioniL.ErcolaniP. (1995). Assessing referential communication skills in the primary school years: A comparative study. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13, 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.1995.tb00661.x
54.
LoukusaS.LeinonenE.JussilaK.MattilaM. L.RyderN.EbelingH.MoilanenI. (2007). Answering contextually demanding questions: Pragmatic errors produced by children with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Journal of Communication Disorders, 40(5), 357–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2006.10.001
55.
LoukusaS.LeinonenE.KuusikkoS.JussilaK.MattilaM. L.RyderN.EbelingH.MoilanenI. (2007). Use of context in pragmatic language comprehension by children with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(6), 1049–1059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0247-2
56.
LoukusaS.LeinonenE.RyderN. (2007). Development of pragmatic language comprehension in Finnish-speaking children. First Language, 27(3), 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723707076568
57.
LoukusaS.MäkinenL.GabbatoreI.Laukkanen-NevalaP.LeinonenE. (2017). Understanding contextual and social meaning in typically developing Finnish-speaking four- to eight-year-old children. Psychology of Language and Communication, 21(1), 408–428. https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2017-0020
58.
LoukusaS.MäkinenL.MoilanenI.Kuusikko-GauffinS.EbelingH.LeinonenE. (2018). Assessing social-pragmatic inferencing skills in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Communication Disorders, 73, 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2018.01.006
59.
LoukusaS.MoilanenI. (2009). Pragmatic inference abilities in individuals with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. A review. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3(4), 890–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2009.05.002
60.
MackieL.LawJ. (2010). Pragmatic language and the child with emotional/behavioural difficulties (EBD): A pilot study exploring the interaction between behaviour and communication disability. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 45(4), 397–410. https://doi.org/10.3109/13682820903105137
61.
MäkinenL.GabbatoreI.LoukusaS.KunnariS.SchneiderP. (2020). A comparison of picture-based narratives by Finnish, Italian and English-speaking children. Early Education and Development, 31(3), 395–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2019.1666446
62.
MatsonJ. L.MatheisM.BurnsC. O.EspositoG.VenutiP.PisulaE.MisiakA.KalyvaE.TsakirisV.KamioY.IshitobiM.GoldinR. L. (2017). Examining cross-cultural differences in autism spectrum disorder: A multinational comparison from Greece, Italy, Japan, Poland, and the United States. European Psychiatry, 42, 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.10.007
63.
MatsonJ. L.WorleyJ. A.KozlowskiA. M.ChungK. M.JungW.YangJ. W. (2012). Cross cultural differences of parent reported social skills in children with autistic disorder: An examination between South Korea and the United States of America. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6(3), 971–977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2011.07.019
64.
MatsumotoD.HwangH. C. (2016). The cultural bases of nonverbal communication. In MatsumotoD.HwangH. C.FrankM. G. (Eds.), APA handbook of nonverbal communication (pp. 77–101). American Psychological Association.
65.
MurrayA. D.JohnsonJ.PetersJ. (1990). Fine-tuning of utterance length to preverbal infants: Effects on later language development. Journal of Child Language, 17(3), 511–525. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900010862
66.
NorburyC. F.BishopD. V. M. (2005). Children’s Communication Checklist-2: A validation study. Travaus Neuchȃtelois De Lingistique, 42, 53–63. https://doc.rero.ch/record/18414
67.
O’ReillyK.PetersonC. C.WellmanH. M. (2014). Sarcasm and advanced theory of mind understanding in children and adults with prelingual deafness. Developmental Psychology, 50(7), 1862–1877. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036654
68.
ParsonsT. D.RizzoA. R.ZaagC. V. D.McGeeJ. S.BuckwalterJ. G. (2005). Gender differences and cognition among older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 12(1), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825580590925125
69.
PayneK. T.TaylorO. L. (2002). Multicultural influences on human communication. In ShamesG. H.AndersonN. B. (Eds.), Human communication disorders. An introduction (6th ed., pp. 106–140). Allyn & Bacon.
PetersonE.VaattovaaraJ. (2014). Kiitos and Pliis: The relationship of native and borrowed politeness markers in Finnish. Journal of Politeness Research, 10(2), 247–269. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2014-0011
72.
RoulstoneS.LoaderS.NorthstoneK.BeveridgeM. (2002). The speech and language of children aged 25 months: Descriptive data from the Avon longitudinal study of parents and children. Early Child Development and Care, 172(3), 259–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430212126
73.
RyderN.LeinonenE. (2003). Use of context in question answering by 3-, 4- and 5-year-old children. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 397–415. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024847529077
74.
RyderN.LeinonenE.SchulzJ. (2008). Cognitive approach to assessing pragmatic language comprehension in children with specific language impairment. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 43(4), 427–447. https://doi.org/10.1080/13682820701633207
75.
Sallinen-KuparinenA. (1986). Finnish communication reticence. Perceptions and self-reported behavior. University of Jyvaskyla.
76.
Sallinen-KuparinenA.McCroskeyJ. C.RichmondV. P. (1991). Willingness to communicate, communication apprehension, introversion, and self-reported communication competence: Finnish and American comparisons. Communication Research Reports, 8(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824099109359876
77.
SperberD.WilsonD. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Basil Blackwell.
StiversT.EnfieldN. J.BrownP.EnglertC.HayashiM.HeinemannT.HoymannG.RossanoF.de RuiterJ. P.YoonK.-E.LevinsonS. C. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(26), 10587–10592. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903616106
80.
VäisänenR.LoukusaS.MoilanenI.YlihervaA. (2014). Language and pragmatic profile in children with ADHD measured by Children’s Communication Checklist2nd edition.Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology, 39(4), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.3109/14015439.2013.784802
81.
VézinaM.SylvestreA.QuébecQ. C.FossardM. (2013). Développement de la version québécoise francophone du Children’s Communication Checklist–2 (CCC-2): Normalisation et équivalence métrique. [Development of a Quebec French version of the Children’s Communication Checklist – 2 (CCC-2): Normalisation and metric equivalence]. Canadian Journal of Speech-Language Pathology & Audiology, 37, 156–168. https://doc.rero.ch/record/322608
82.
XuZ. (2014). Contextual dimensions in interactional humour: How humour is practiced in selected American and Chinese situation comedies. Journal of Pragmatics, 60, 24–35.
83.
YlihervaA.LoukusaS.VäisänenR.PyperA.MoilanenI. (2009). Development of communication skills in Finnish pre-school children examined by the Children’s Communication Checklist (CCC). Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 25, 235–249.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
