A Comparison of Persian Vowel Production in Hearing-Impaired Children Using a Cochlear Implant and Normal-Hearing Children

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Narges Jafari ◽  
Michael Drinnan ◽  
Reyhane Mohamadi ◽  
Fariba Yadegari ◽  
Mandana Nourbakhsh ◽  
...  
2002 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 1027-1038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalie M. Uchanski ◽  
Ann E. Geers ◽  
Athanassios Protopapas

Exposure to modified speech has been shown to benefit children with languagelearning impairments with respect to their language skills (M. M. Merzenich et al., 1998; P. Tallal et al., 1996). In the study by Tallal and colleagues, the speech modification consisted of both slowing down and amplifying fast, transitional elements of speech. In this study, we examined whether the benefits of modified speech could be extended to provide intelligibility improvements for children with severe-to-profound hearing impairment who wear sensory aids. In addition, the separate effects on intelligibility of slowing down and amplifying speech were evaluated. Two groups of listeners were employed: 8 severe-to-profoundly hearingimpaired children and 5 children with normal hearing. Four speech-processing conditions were tested: (1) natural, unprocessed speech; (2) envelope-amplified speech; (3) slowed speech; and (4) both slowed and envelope-amplified speech. For each condition, three types of speech materials were used: words in sentences, isolated words, and syllable contrasts. To degrade the performance of the normal-hearing children, all testing was completed with a noise background. Results from the hearing-impaired children showed that all varieties of modified speech yielded either equivalent or poorer intelligibility than unprocessed speech. For words in sentences and isolated words, the slowing-down of speech had no effect on intelligibility scores whereas envelope amplification, both alone and combined with slowing-down, yielded significantly lower scores. Intelligibility results from normal-hearing children listening in noise were somewhat similar to those from hearing-impaired children. For isolated words, the slowing-down of speech had no effect on intelligibility whereas envelope amplification degraded intelligibility. For both subject groups, speech processing had no statistically significant effect on syllable discrimination. In summary, without extensive exposure to the speech processing conditions, children with impaired hearing and children with normal hearing listening in noise received no intelligibility advantage from either slowed speech or envelope-amplified speech.


Author(s):  
Liesbeth Vanormelingen ◽  
Sven De Maeyer ◽  
Steven Gillis

The present study examines the amount of input and output in congenitally hearing-impaired children with a cochlear implant (CI) and normally-hearing children (NH) and their normally-hearing mothers. The aim of the study was threefold: (a) to investigate the input provided by the two groups of mothers, (b) to investigate the output of the two groups of children, and (c) to investigate the influence of the mothers’ input on child output and expressive vocabulary size. Mothers are less influenced by their children’s hearing status than the children are: CI children are more talkative and slower speakers. Mothers influenced their children on most parameters, but strikingly, it was not maternal talkativeness as such, but the number of maternal turns that is the best predictor of a child’s expressive vocabulary size.


QJM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 113 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A M Saad ◽  
M A Hegazi ◽  
M S Khodeir

Abstract Background Lip-reading is considered an important skill which varies considerably among normal hearing and hearing impaired (HI) children. It helps HI children to perceive speech, acquire spoken language and acquire phonological awareness. Speech perception is considered to be a multisensory process that involves attention to auditory signals as well as visual articulatory movements. Integration of auditory and visual signals occurs naturally and automatically in normal individuals across all ages. Many researches suggested that normal hearing children use audition as the primary sensory modality for speech perception, whereas HI children use lip-reading cues as the primary sensory modality for speech perception. Aim of the Work The aim of this study is to compare the lip-reading ability between normal and HI children. Participants and methods This is a comparative descriptive case control study. It was applied on 60 hearing impaired children (cases) and 60 normal hearing children (controls) of the same age and gender. The age range was (3-8 years). The Egyptian Arabic Lip-reading Test was applied to all children. Results There was statistically significant difference between the total mean scores of the EALRT between normal and HI children. Conclusion The results of the study proved that normal children are better lip-readers than HI children of the matched age range.


2000 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 902-914 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia G. Stelmachowicz ◽  
Brenda M. Hoover ◽  
Dawna E. Lewis ◽  
Reinier W. L. Kortekaas ◽  
Andrea L. Pittman

In this study, the influence of stimulus context and audibility on sentence recognition was assessed in 60 normal-hearing children, 23 hearing-impaired children, and 20 normal-hearing adults. Performance-intensity (PI) functions were obtained for 60 semantically correct and 60 semantically anomalous sentences. For each participant, an audibility index (AI) was calculated at each presentation level, and a logistic function was fitted to rau-transformed percent-correct values to estimate the SPL and AI required to achieve 70% performance. For both types of sentences, there was a systematic age-related shift in the PI functions, suggesting that young children require a higher AI to achieve performance equivalent to that of adults. Improvement in performance with the addition of semantic context was statistically significant only for the normal-hearing 5-year-olds and adults. Data from the hearing-impaired children showed age-related trends that were similar to those of the normal-hearing children, with the majority of individual data falling within the 5th and 95th percentile of normal. The implications of these findings in terms of hearing-aid fitting strategies for young children are discussed.


1978 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 372-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen E. Crandall

Spontaneous sign-language samples were collected in a controlled interactive situation from 20 young hearing-impaired children and their mothers. Inflectional morphemes in the samples were described by cher attributes and classified for syntactic function within utterances. Inflectional morpheme productivity did not increase significantly with age; mean manual English morphemes per utterance did increase with age. The first six inflectional morphemes used by the children studied were the same as those used by normal-hearing children. A good predictor of the child’s use of inflectional morphemes was the mother’s use of these morphemes.


1992 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul A. Dagenais ◽  
Paula Critz-Crosby

Glossometric measures of tongue positions of 10 normal-hearing (NH) and 10 profoundly hearing-impaired (HI) children were compared during production of the eight vowels /i,I,ε,æ,u,U,o,a/. The NH subjects used tongue positions with distinct vertical distances from the hard palate and discrete tongue shapes to distinguish the front vowels and the back vowels. The HI subjects produced vowels using a reduced vertical range and singular flat, high-back tongue shape. Token-to-token variability was greater for the HI subjects. Listener identifications of the vowels produced by the HI subjects fell in three categories: highly variable responses to /i/, low vowels for /I,ε,æ,a/, and back vowels for /u,U,o/. The centralized, generally undifferentiated tongue positions and listener identifications for the HI subjects coincided with suppositions made from previous perceptual, acoustic, and physiologic findings.


2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (5) ◽  
pp. 251-257
Author(s):  
Faustino Núñez-Batalla ◽  
Gabriela Vasile ◽  
Noelia Cartón-Corona ◽  
Daniel Pedregal-Mallo ◽  
Marta Menéndez de Castro ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document