Vocabulary Development and the Shape Bias in Children With Hearing Loss

Purpose Although children with hearing loss (HL) can benefit from cochlear implants (CIs) and hearing aids (HAs), they often show language delays. Moreover, little is known about the mechanisms by which children with HL learn words. One mechanism by which typically hearing (TH) children learn words is by acquiring word learning biases such as the “shape bias,” that is, generalizing the names of novel solid objects by similarity in shape. In TH children, the shape bias emerges out of regularities in the early vocabulary and, once acquired, has consequences for subsequent vocabulary development. Method Here, we ask whether children with HL exhibit similar word learning biases as TH children. In the current study, nineteen 2- to 3.5-year-old children with HL generalized the names of novel objects by similarity in shape or material. We compared their performance to that of 20 TH children matched on age and 20 TH children matched on vocabulary size. Results Children with HL were significantly less likely than age-matched TH children and vocabulary-matched TH children to generalize novel names to objects of the same shape. However, there was also an interaction such that vocabulary has a stronger effect on novel noun generalization for those with HL than for those who are TH. Exploratory analyses of children with HL reveal similar novel noun generalization and vocabulary sizes in children who use CIs and those who use HAs, regardless of hearing age or degree of HL. Conclusion Together, the results suggest that, although vocabulary knowledge drives development of the shape bias in general for all children, it may be especially important for children with HL, who are at risk for language delays.

Download Full-text

The Devil in the Details Can Be Hard to Spot: Malapropisms and Children With Hearing Loss

Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools ◽

10.1044/2020_lshss-20-00033 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-19

Author(s):

Joanna H. Lowenstein ◽

Susan Nittrouer

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Phonological Awareness ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Phonological Processing ◽

Speech Signal ◽

Word Reading ◽

Verbal Working Memory ◽

Academic Competence ◽

Vocabulary Knowledge ◽

Children With Hearing Loss

Purpose Better auditory prostheses and earlier interventions have led to remarkable improvements in spoken language abilities for children with hearing loss (HL), but these children often still struggle academically. This study tested a hypothesis for why this may be, proposing that the language of school becomes increasingly disconnected from everyday discourse, requiring greater reliance on bottom-up phonological structure, and children with HL have difficulty recovering that structure from the speech signal. Participants One hundred nineteen fourth graders participated: 48 with normal hearing (NH), 19 with moderate losses who used hearing aids (HAs), and 52 with severe-to-profound losses who used cochlear implants (CIs). Method Three analyses were conducted. #1: Sentences with malapropisms were created, and children's abilities to recognize them were assessed. #2: Factors contributing to those abilities were evaluated, including phonological awareness, phonological processing, vocabulary, verbal working memory, and oral narratives. #3: Teachers' ratings of students' academic competence were obtained, and factors accounting for those ratings were evaluated, including the five listed above, along with word reading and reading comprehension. Results #1: Children with HAs and CIs performed more poorly on malapropism recognition than children with NH, but similarly to each other. #2: All children with HL demonstrated large phonological deficits, but they were especially large for children with CIs. Phonological awareness explained the most variance in malapropism recognition for children with CIs. Vocabulary knowledge explained malapropism recognition for children with NH or HAs, but other factors also contributed. #3: Teachers rated academic competence for children with CIs more poorly than for children with NH or HAs, and variance in those ratings for children with CIs were primarily explained by malapropism scores. Conclusion Children with HL have difficulty recognizing acoustic–phonetic detail in the speech signal, and that constrains their abilities to follow conversations in academic settings, especially if HL is severe enough to require CIs. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13133018

Download Full-text

Triggering, Configuration, and Engagement

The Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies in Learning and Cognition ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190054045.013.5 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 137-149

Author(s):

Emily Lund

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Word Learning ◽

Educational Interventions ◽

Normal Hearing ◽

Vocabulary Knowledge ◽

Academic Skill ◽

Learning Differences ◽

Cascading Effects ◽

New Words ◽

Children With Hearing Loss

Word learning and vocabulary knowledge, although related, represent distinct constructs. The process by which a child learns new words will affect both the quantity of words learned and the quality of word representations in a child’s lexicon. Children with normal hearing experience predictable patterns of learning via the processes of triggering, configuration, and engagement. Children with hearing loss may experience, for various reasons, disruptions at all three levels. Those difficulties with the process of word learning may then lead to delays and differences in vocabulary knowledge, with cascading effects on other linguistic and academic skill development. Cultivating an understanding of how hearing loss affects not only vocabulary outcomes but also word-learning processes in children with hearing loss may provide avenues for future educational interventions that interrupt the adverse consequences of poor lexical knowledge. This chapter addresses the process of spoken word learning in children with normal hearing and the ways in which hearing loss affects this the subprocesses of triggering, configuration and engagement. The consequences of word-learning differences on other later-developing skills, such as phonological awareness, are discussed.

Download Full-text

FM Verification for the 21 st Century

Perspectives on Hearing and Hearing Disorders in Childhood ◽

10.1044/hhdc18.1.4 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

pp. 4-9 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Leisha Eiten ◽

Dawna Lewis

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Hearing Aid ◽

Current Technology ◽

The Past ◽

Technological Advances ◽

Children With Hearing Loss

Background: For children with hearing loss, the benefits of FM systems in overcoming deleterious effects of noise, distance, and reverberation have led to recommendations for use beyond classroom settings. It is important that audiologists who recommend and fit these devices understand the rationale and procedures underlying fitting and verification. Objectives: This article reviews previousguidelines for FM verification, addresses technological advances, and introduces verification procedures appropriate for current FM and hearing-aid technology. Methods: Previous guidelines for verification of FM systems are reviewed. Those recommendations that are appropriate for current technology are addressed, as are procedures that are no longer adequate for hearing aids and FM systems utilizing more complex processing than in the past. Technological advances are discussed, and an updated approach to FM verification is proposed. Conclusions: Approaches to verification andfitting of FM systems must keep pace with advances in hearing-aid and FM technology. The transparency approach addressed in this paper is recommended for verification of FM systems coupled to hearing aids.

Download Full-text

What Do We Want Them To Be When They Grow Up?

Perspectives on Hearing and Hearing Disorders in Childhood ◽

10.1044/hhdc20.1.27 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 27-31

Author(s):

Lyn Robertson

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Social Development ◽

Young Women ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Test Scores ◽

Spoken Language ◽

Language Therapy ◽

Profound Hearing Loss ◽

Children With Hearing Loss ◽

Learning To Listen

Abstract Learning to listen and speak are well-established preludes for reading, writing, and succeeding in mainstream educational settings. Intangibles beyond the ubiquitous test scores that typically serve as markers for progress in children with hearing loss are embedded in descriptions of the educational and social development of four young women. All were diagnosed with severe-to-profound or profound hearing loss as toddlers, and all were fitted with hearing aids and given listening and spoken language therapy. Compiling stories across the life span provides insights into what we can be doing in the lives of young children with hearing loss.

Download Full-text

Hearing Technology Use and Management in School-Age Children: Reports from Data Logs, Parents, and Teachers

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology ◽

10.3766/jaaa.16042 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 28 (10) ◽

pp. 883-892 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Samantha J. Gustafson ◽

Todd A. Ricketts ◽

Anne Marie Tharpe

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Hearing Aid ◽

Parent Report ◽

School Age Children ◽

School Age ◽

Data Logging ◽

Hearing Aid Use ◽

System Use ◽

Children With Hearing Loss

Background: Consistency of hearing aid and remote microphone system use declines as school-age children with hearing loss age. One indicator of hearing aid use time is data logging, another is parent report. Recent data suggest that parents overestimate their children’s hearing aid use time relative to data logging. The potential reasons for this disparity remain unclear. Because school-age children spend the majority of their day away from their parents and with their teachers, reports from teachers might serve as a valuable and additional tool for estimating hearing aid use time and management. Purpose: This study expands previous research on factors influencing hearing aid use time in school-age children using data logging records. Discrepancies between data logging records and parent reports were explored using custom surveys designed for parents and teachers. Responses from parents and teachers were used to examine hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management in school-age children. Study Sample: Thirteen children with mild-to-moderate hearing loss between the ages of 7 and 10 yr and their parents participated in this study. Teachers of ten of these children also participated. Data Collection and Analysis: Parents and teachers of children completed written surveys about each child’s hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management skills. Data logs were read from hearing aids using manufacturer’s software. Multiple linear regression analysis and an intraclass correlation coefficient were used to examine factors influencing hearing aid use time and parent agreement with data logs. Parent report of hearing aid use time was compared across various activities and school and nonschool days. Survey responses from parents and teachers were compared to explore areas requiring potential improvement in audiological counseling. Results: Average daily hearing aid use time was ˜6 hr per day as recorded with data logging technology. Children exhibiting greater degrees of hearing loss and those with poorer vocabulary were more likely to use hearing aids consistently than children with less hearing loss and better vocabulary. Parents overestimated hearing aid use by ˜1 hr per day relative to data logging records. Parent-reported use of hearing aids varied across activities but not across school and nonschool days. Overall, parents and teachers showed excellent agreement on hearing aid and remote microphone system use during school instruction but poor agreement when asked about the child’s ability to manage their hearing devices independently. Conclusions: Parental reports of hearing aid use in young school-age children are largely consistent with data logging records and with teacher reports of hearing aid use in the classroom. Audiologists might find teacher reports helpful in learning more about children’s hearing aid management and remote microphone system use during their time at school. This supplementary information can serve as an additional counseling tool to facilitate discussion about remote microphone system use and hearing aid management in school-age children with hearing loss.

Download Full-text

The Acquisition of Acoustic Cues to Onset and Coda Voicing Contrasts by Preschoolers With Hearing Loss

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research ◽

10.1044/2021_jslhr-20-00311 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-18

Author(s):

Laurence Bruggeman ◽

Julien Millasseau ◽

Ivan Yuen ◽

Katherine Demuth

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Cochlear Implants ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Self Esteem ◽

Acoustic Cues ◽

Elicited Imitation ◽

Phonological Representations ◽

Initial Onset ◽

English Speaking ◽

Children With Hearing Loss

Purpose Children with hearing loss (HL), including those with hearing aids (HAs) and cochlear implants (CIs), often have difficulties contrasting words like “ b each ” versus “ p each ” and “ do g ” versus “ do ck ” due to challenges producing systematic voicing contrasts. Even when acoustic contrasts are present, these may not be perceived as such by others. This can cause miscommunication, leading to poor self-esteem and social isolation. Acoustic evidence is therefore needed to determine if these children have established distinct voicing categories before entering school and if misperceptions are due to a lack of phonological representations or due to a still-maturing implementation system. The findings should help inform more effective early intervention. Method Participants included 14 children with HL (eight HA users, five CI users, and one bimodal) and 20 with normal hearing, all English-speaking preschoolers. In an elicited imitation task, they produced consonant–vowel–consonant minimal pair words that contrasted voicing in word-initial (onset) or word-final (coda) position at all three places of articulation (PoAs). Results Overall, children with HL showed acoustically distinct voicing categories for both onsets and codas at all three PoAs. Contrasts were less systematic for codas than for onsets, as also confirmed by adults' perceptual ratings. Conclusions Preschoolers with HL produce acoustic differences for voiced versus voiceless onsets and codas, indicating distinct phonological representations for both. Nonetheless, codas were less accurately perceived by adult raters, especially when produced by CI users. This suggests a protracted development of the phonetic implementation of codas, where CI users, in particular, may benefit from targeted intervention.

Download Full-text

Low-level Speech Recognition of Children with Hearing Aids

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology ◽

10.1055/a-1692-9670 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Jace Wolfe ◽

Mila Duke ◽

Sharon Miller ◽

Erin Schafer ◽

Christine Jones ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Speech Recognition ◽

Word Recognition ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Hearing Aid ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Second Phase ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Low Level ◽

Children With Hearing Loss

Background: For children with hearing loss, the primary goal of hearing aids is to provide improved access to the auditory environment within the limits of hearing aid technology and the child’s auditory abilities. However, there are limited data examining aided speech recognition at very low (40 dBA) and low (50 dBA) presentation levels. Purpose: Due to the paucity of studies exploring aided speech recognition at low presentation levels for children with hearing loss, the present study aimed to 1) compare aided speech recognition at different presentation levels between groups of children with normal hearing and hearing loss, 2) explore the effects of aided pure tone average (PTA) and aided Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) on aided speech recognition at low presentation levels for children with hearing loss ranging in degree from mild to severe, and 3) evaluate the effect of increasing low-level gain on aided speech recognition of children with hearing loss. Research Design: In phase 1 of this study, a two-group, repeated-measures design was used to evaluate differences in speech recognition. In phase 2 of this study, a single-group, repeated-measures design was used to evaluate the potential benefit of additional low-level hearing aid gain for low-level aided speech recognition of children with hearing loss. Study Sample: The first phase of the study included 27 school-age children with mild to severe sensorineural hearing loss and 12 school-age children with normal hearing. The second phase included eight children with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Intervention: Prior to the study, children with hearing loss were fitted binaurally with digital hearing aids. Children in the second phase were fitted binaurally with digital study hearing aids and completed a trial period with two different gain settings: 1) gain required to match hearing aid output to prescriptive targets (i.e., primary program), and 2) a 6-dB increase in overall gain for low-level inputs relative to the primary program. In both phases of this study, real-ear verification measures were completed to ensure the hearing aid output matched prescriptive targets. Data Collection and Analysis: Phase 1 included monosyllabic word recognition and syllable-final plural recognition at three presentation levels (40, 50, and 60 dBA). Phase 2 compared speech recognition performance for the same test measures and presentation levels with two differing gain prescriptions. Results and Conclusions: In phase 1 of the study, aided speech recognition was significantly poorer in children with hearing loss at all presentation levels. Higher aided SII in the better ear (55 dB SPL input) was associated with higher CNC word recognition at a 40 dBA presentation level. In phase 2, increasing the hearing aid gain for low-level inputs provided a significant improvement in syllable-final plural recognition at very low-level inputs and resulted in a non-significant trend toward better monosyllabic word recognition at very low presentation levels. Additional research is needed to document the speech recognition difficulties children with hearing aids may experience with low-level speech in the real world as well as the potential benefit or detriment of providing additional low-level hearing aid gain

Download Full-text