Literature DB >> 11141016

Speech perception in children with cochlear implants: effects of lexical difficulty, talker variability, and word length.

K I Kirk1, M Hay-McCutcheon, S T Sehgal, R T Miyamoto.   

Abstract

The present results demonstrated that all 3 factors --lexical difficulty, stimulus variability, and word length--significantly influenced spoken word recognition by children with multichannel cochlear implants. Lexically easy words were recognized significantly better than lexically hard words, regardless of talker condition or word length of the stimuli. These results support the earlier findings of Kirk et al(12) obtained with live-voice stimulus presentation and suggest that lexical effects are very robust. Despite the fact that listeners with cochlear implants receive a degraded speech signal, it appears that they organize and access words from memory relationally in the context of other words. The present results concerning talker variability contradict those previously reported in the literature for listeners with normal hearing(7,11) and for listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss who use hearing aids.(14) The previous investigators used talkers and word lists different from those used in the current study and found that word recognition declined as talker variability increased. In the current study, word recognition was better in the multiple-talker condition than in the single-talker condition. Kirk(15) reported similar results for postlingually deafened adults with cochlear implants who were tested on the recorded word lists used in the present study. Although the talkers were equally intelligible to listeners with normal hearing in the pilot study, they were not equally intelligible to children or adults with cochlear implants. It appears that either the man in the single-talker condition was particularly difficult to understand or that some of the talkers in the multiple-talker condition were particularly easy to understand. Despite the unexpected direction of the talker effects, the present results demonstrate that children with cochlear implants are sensitive to differences among talkers and that talker characteristics influence their spoken word recognition. We are conducting a study to assess the intelligibility of each of the 6 talkers to listeners with cochlear implants. Such studies should aid the development of equivalent testing conditions for listeners with cochlear implants. There are 2 possible reasons the children in the present study identified multisyllabic words better than monosyllabic words. First, they may use the linguistic redundancy cues in multisyllabic words to aid in spoken word recognition. Second, multisyllabic words come from relatively sparse lexical neighborhoods compared with monosyllabic tokens. That is, multisyllabic words have fewer phonetically similar words, or neighbors, competing for selection than do monosyllabic stimuli. These lexical characteristics most likely contribute to the differences in identification noted as a function of word length. The significant lexical and word length effects noted here may yield important diagnostic information about spoken word recognition by children with sensory aids. For example, children who can make relatively fine phonetic distinctions should demonstrate only small differences in the recognition of lexically easy versus hard words or of monosyllabic versus multisyllabic stimuli. In contrast, children who process speech using broad phonetic categories should show much larger differences. That is, they may not be able to accurately encode words in general or lexically hard words specifically. Further study is warranted to determine the interaction between spoken word recognition and individual word encoding strategies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11141016     DOI: 10.1177/0003489400109s1234

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl        ISSN: 0096-8056


  10 in total

1.  Assessing spoken word recognition in children who are deaf or hard of hearing: a translational approach.

Authors:  Karen Iler Kirk; Lindsay Prusick; Brian French; Chad Gotch; Laurie S Eisenberg; Nancy Young
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.664

2.  The ear is connected to the brain: some new directions in the study of children with cochlear implants at Indiana University.

Authors:  Derek M Houston; Jessica Beer; Tonya R Bergeson; Steven B Chin; David B Pisoni; Richard T Miyamoto
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.664

3.  Factors Influencing Elementary and High-School Aged Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Emily A Tobey; Ann E Geers; Madhu Sundarrajan; Janet Lane
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Mandarin Tone and Vowel Recognition in Cochlear Implant Users: Effects of Talker Variability and Bimodal Hearing.

Authors:  Yi-Ping Chang; Ronald Y Chang; Chun-Yi Lin; Xin Luo
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Working Memory Spans as Predictors of Spoken Word Recognition and Receptive Vocabulary in Children with Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Miranda Cleary; David B Pisoni; Karen Iler Kirk
Journal:  Volta Rev       Date:  2000

6.  Profiles of verbal working memory growth predict speech and language development in children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  William G Kronenberger; David B Pisoni; Michael S Harris; Helena M Hoen; Huiping Xu; Richard T Miyamoto
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  Article 1: Long-Term outcomes of cochlear implantation in early childhood: Sample characteristics and data collection methods.

Authors:  Ann E Geers; Chris Brenner; Emily A Tobey
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Longitudinal speech perception and language performance in pediatric cochlear implant users: the effect of age at implantation.

Authors:  Camille C Dunn; Elizabeth A Walker; Jacob Oleson; Maura Kenworthy; Tanya Van Voorst; J Bruce Tomblin; Haihong Ji; Karen I Kirk; Bob McMurray; Marlan Hanson; Bruce J Gantz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  The effect of modern standard arabic orthography on speech production by Arab children with hearing loss.

Authors:  Tova Most; Iris Levin; Marwa Sarsour
Journal:  J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ       Date:  2007-11-19

10.  An Examination of Sources of Variability Across the Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant Test in Cochlear Implant Listeners.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer; Eugene Spindler; Steven M Bierer; Richard Wright
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 3.293

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.