Literature DB >> 31418716

Pattern Perception in Quiet and at Different Signal to Noise Ratio in Children with Learning Disability.

Kumari Apeksha1, Bindhu Hyakanuru Mahadevaswamy1, Sahana Mahadev1, Moulya Thamadehalli Shivananda1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess pattern perception at different signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in children with learning disability (LD) and typically developing children. The first objective of this study was to estimate the identification scores in quiet and at different SNR (0 dB SNR and -5 dB SNR) in children with LD and to compare the result with the typically developing children. The second objective of the study was to estimate identification scores for words differing in syllable length (monosyllable, bisyllable, and trisyllable) for both the groups of children with LD and typically developing children and to compare the result for both the groups.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants included 60 children including 40 typically developing children and 20 children with LD in the age range 7-11 years. Speech perception was assessed using words varying in syllable length (monosyllables, bisyllables, and trisyllables), and was tested in quiet and at different SNR (0 dB SNR and -5 dB SNR).
RESULTS: Compared to typically developing children, perception was affected in children with LD. For children with LD, the perception was best in quiet condition and was least at -5 dB SNR. Trisyllables showed the best result followed by bisyllables and monosyllables.
CONCLUSION: Children with LD showed poor pattern perception compared to typically developing children. SNR had a significant effect on the performance of children with LD. The length of the stimuli also had an effect on the perception in children with LD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31418716      PMCID: PMC6750774          DOI: 10.5152/iao.2019.6710

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Int Adv Otol        ISSN: 1308-7649            Impact factor:   1.017


  6 in total

1.  Word length and lexical activation: longer is better.

Authors:  Mark A Pitt; Arthur G Samuel
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 2.  What definitions of learning disability say and don't say: a critical analysis.

Authors:  K A Kavale; S R Forness
Journal:  J Learn Disabil       Date:  2000 May-Jun

3.  Brain responses to changes in speech sound durations differ between infants with and without familial risk for dyslexia.

Authors:  Paavo H T Leppänen; Ulla Richardson; Elina Pihko; Kenneth M Eklund; Tomi K Guttorm; Mikko Aro; Heikki Lyytinen
Journal:  Dev Neuropsychol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.253

4.  Speech perception and the discrimination of brief auditory cues in reading disabled children.

Authors:  M A Reed
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  1989-10

5.  Acoustical Barriers to Learning: Children at Risk in Every Classroom.

Authors:  Peggy B Nelson; Sig Soli
Journal:  Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch       Date:  2000-10-01       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Speaking clearly for children with learning disabilities: sentence perception in noise.

Authors:  Ann R Bradlow; Nina Kraus; Erin Hayes
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.297

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.