BACKGROUND: Interventions for Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) span explicit and implicit approaches, yet Matching-to-Sample (MTS) protocols, a well-established method for fostering equivalence-based learning, remain unexamined in this population. The partly incidental and implicit nature of these protocols may align more closely with the way language skills are acquired in everyday contexts. AIMS: To assess their potential for use in individuals with DLD, we conducted a scoping review of MTS-based language interventions in individuals with language impairments. METHODS: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines and using Web of Science and PsycINFO, sixteen studies (N = 81, primarily children and adolescents) met inclusion criteria, the key requirement being evidence of language difficulties. In most studies, these difficulties co-occurred with diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder or intellectual disability. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: The review revealed that most interventions targeted foundational receptive and expressive skills and reliably produced untrained (derived) stimulus relations, underscoring the efficacy of implicit learning mechanisms. However, small sample sizes, varied MTS formats, and a dearth of long-term follow-up constrain generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings position MTS as a promising framework for DLD but highlight the need for controlled trials with standardized protocols, larger and DLD-specific cohorts, and measures of sustained, functional language gains. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Matching-to-sample (MTS) training protocols have been successfully applied to teach a wide range of skills across diverse populations. However, systematic reviews specifically evaluating the potential of MTS-based language interventions for individuals with language impairments, and for Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) in particular, are lacking. What this study adds to existing knowledge This scoping review identified a relatively small number of studies involving individuals with language difficulties, most of whom also presented with co-occurring neurocognitive conditions. No studies were found that focused specifically on individuals with DLD. Across the available studies, outcomes were generally positive, with evidence not only for gains in explicitly trained language skills but also for the emergence of untrained foundational language skills. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this study? If positive findings are replicated in larger, well-controlled trials that also address more advanced language abilities, MTS-based language interventions may represent a promising approach for the sustained improvement of language skills in individuals with DLD.
Maes et al. (Fri,) studied this question.