Comprehension of wh-questions among Jordanian children with autism spectrum disorder and specific language impairment

The study examines how Jordanian Arabic-speaking children aged 6–8 with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and specific developmental language impairment (SDLI) comprehend wh-questions, focusing on subject and object forms of who and which. Building on theories of syntactic movement (wh-movement) and prior evidence that such dependencies pose difficulties for individuals with language impairments, the research investigates whether ASD-related language difficulties resemble those in SDLI. The purpose is to determine group-specific comprehension patterns and challenges, particularly given Arabic’s SVO/VSO word orders and the added complexity of movement for wh-questions. The study fills a gap by targeting Jordanian Arabic-speaking children with ASD or SDLI, a population underrepresented in prior work predominantly centered on English or other languages.

Prior research highlights that sentences involving syntactic movement (e.g., wh-questions and relative clauses) are challenging for individuals with language impairments (Friedmann & Novogrodsky, 2004, 2007; Friedmann & Haddad-Hanna, 2014). Arabic and related languages show difficulties particularly for object relatives and which-object questions in hearing-impaired populations (Friedmann & Haddad-Hanna, 2014). In autism, comprehension of wh-questions emerges later but follows similar developmental ordering as in typical development (Goodwin et al., 2012); findings on whether syntax is impaired in ASD are mixed (Joseph et al., 2002; Rapin & Dunn, 2003; Eigsti et al., 2011). Studies indicate that movement and intervention effects, along with feature similarity, affect children’s sentence comprehension (Durrleman et al., 2016). Within Arabic, forming wh-questions requires moving the queried noun phrase and tracking traces, increasing processing demands (Ryding, 2005; Friedmann & Costa, 2011; Elman, 1995). Overall, literature suggests particular vulnerability for object questions and which-questions due to longer movement and intervention, motivating the current comparison across ASD, SDLI, and TD children in Jordanian Arabic.

Design: Comparative, cross-sectional study assessing comprehension of wh-questions derived by syntactic movement in Jordanian Arabic, using picture-selection binary tasks. Data were analyzed with one-way repeated measures ANOVA and Scheffé post hoc tests to compare groups (ASD, SDLI, TD) across question types and task formats. Participants: N=45 children (ages 6–8), divided into three groups (n=15 each): ASD (8 males, 7 females; mean age 7.20, SD 0.77), SDLI (11 males, 4 females; mean age 6.80, SD 0.94), and typically developing (10 males, 5 females; mean age 7.27, SD 0.70). ASD participants were clinically diagnosed by a pediatric psychiatrist and enrolled in an autism center in Amman, Jordan; none were classified as low functioning per DSM-IV-TR. SDLI participants met exclusionary criteria (no hearing or oral-motor issues; no neurological impairment; no ASD-like social symptoms) and were clinically identified by speech-language pathologists/educational specialists. TD children had no neurological developmental difficulties. All were native speakers of Jordanian Arabic. Instrumentation and translation/validation: The study adapted the wh-question comprehension scale from Friedmann & Novogrodsky (2011), translating figures and materials from English into Arabic. Two professional Arabic translators produced translations, which were reviewed by three bilingual experts (total five experts validated accuracy). Pilot comprehension checks were conducted with seven Arabic-speaking postgraduate students and ten school children to ensure clarity. Tasks and procedure: Two binary picture-selection tasks assessed comprehension. - Task 1: Two-figure task (40 questions total): 20 who-questions and 20 which-questions, each including subject and object variants. Participants viewed a page with two pictures (one target role-mapped; one with reversed roles) and pointed to the picture matching the question. Example items included who-subject, which-subject, who-object, which-object questions. - Task 2: Three-figure task (40 questions total): 20 who- and 20 which-questions (subject/object variants) using pictures with three characters to increase complexity. Example items paralleled Task 1 but with three-character scenes. Administration: Individual testing in quiet rooms, sessions lasting 40–60 minutes, no time limits per item. Items could be repeated upon participant request. Questions were randomized and presented in two sessions of 20 questions each per task. The same general protocol as Friedmann & Novogrodsky (2011) was followed. Analysis: One-way repeated measures ANOVA compared group performance across question types and tasks; Scheffé tests examined pairwise differences. Outcomes were mean correct responses per condition, with F statistics and p-values reported.

- Across all conditions, ASD children scored significantly lower than SDLI and TD groups. TD children performed best overall. - Subject vs object: Both ASD and SDLI performed better on subject wh-questions than object wh-questions. Object questions were particularly challenging. - Who vs which: Which-questions posed greater difficulty than who-questions for ASD and SDLI. TD children also found object questions harder than subject ones but generally performed well on both who and which. - Task complexity: SDLI and TD groups tended to perform better in the two-figure task than in the three-figure task. In contrast, ASD participants performed slightly better in the three-figure task than in the two-figure task. - Statistical results (selected): • H1 Who-subject: Two-figure task F=168.215, p=0.0001; Three-figure task F=138.821, p=0.0004. Means (Two-figure): ASD 1.27; SDLI 16.93; Control 19.67. Means (Three-figure): ASD 1.87; SDLI 16.20; Control 19.53. • H2 Who-object: Two-figure task F=581.657, p=0.0002; Three-figure task F=210.781, p=0.0001. Means (Two-figure): ASD 0.20; SDLI 16.67; Control 19.00. Means (Three-figure): ASD 0.67; SDLI 12.73; Control 18.80. • H3 Which-subject: Two-figure task F=345.680, p=0.00001; Three-figure task F=173.866, p=0.0003. Means (Two-figure): ASD 0.00; SDLI 13.67; Control 18.87. Means (Three-figure): ASD 0.53; SDLI 9.93; Control 18.67. • H4 Which-object: Two-figure task F=281.873, p=0.0005; Three-figure task F=455.654, p=0.0006. Means (Two-figure): ASD 0.00; SDLI 7.60; Control 18.13. Means (Three-figure): ASD 0.13; SDLI 5.13; Control 17.67. - Interpretation: Results indicate robust group differences with ASD<SDLI<TD across all question types. Greater movement and intervention in which-object structures likely contribute to difficulty. Early-acquired grammatical knowledge (e.g., word order) may guide later wh-comprehension, but movement dependencies remain challenging for ASD and SDLI.

Findings address the research question by demonstrating clear, differential comprehension patterns across ASD, SDLI, and TD groups for wh-questions in Jordanian Arabic. Consistent with movement-based accounts, object and which-questions—requiring longer dependencies and greater susceptibility to intervention—were most impaired in ASD and SDLI, while TD children showed relatively preserved comprehension with some difficulty for object questions. The SDLI group outperformed the ASD group overall, suggesting both shared and distinct profiles of syntactic comprehension difficulties. The unusual pattern that ASD children performed slightly better in three-figure than two-figure tasks may reflect benefits from additional visual-spatial cues or engagement of detail-focused processing strategies, though this remains speculative. The results underscore the role of syntactic movement and feature-based intervention in shaping comprehension outcomes and highlight the importance of considering task complexity and question type in assessment and intervention for Arabic-speaking children with ASD and SDLI.

The study shows that Jordanian Arabic-speaking children with ASD and SDLI have pronounced difficulties comprehending wh-questions involving syntactic movement, especially which- and object-questions. TD children perform best, with object questions posing relatively more challenge. The SDLI group generally outperforms the ASD group, indicating partially overlapping but distinct profiles of impairment. The findings support accounts in which referentiality and feature-based intervention affect thematic role assignment in movement-derived structures, explaining the greater difficulty of which- over who-questions. Future research should: (1) examine a broader range of wh-question types to refine group profiles across ASD and SDLI; and (2) conduct contrastive, age-based studies comparing younger and older individuals to map developmental trajectories in syntactic comprehension.

Explanations for ASD advantages in the three-figure task are explicitly noted as speculative. The study calls for larger sample sizes and diverse cognitive measures in future work, implying limitations related to sample size (n=15 per group), age range restricted to 6–8 years, and reliance on picture-selection tasks. These factors may affect generalizability and the interpretation of task-specific effects.