Family Environmental Dynamics Differentially Influence Spoken Language Development in Children With and Without Hearing Loss

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Rachael Frush Holt ◽  
William G. Kronenberger ◽  
David B. Pisoni
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Family Environment ◽  
Family Dynamics ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Receptive Language ◽  
Receptive Vocabulary ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
The Family

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether families of children with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) are organized similarly to those of typically developing, typically hearing (TH) children and whether the dimensions of family dynamics and environment are related to spoken language development similarly in children with and without SNHL. Method: Primary caregivers of children with SNHL ( n = 63) or TH ( n = 65) completed the Family Environment Scale–Fourth Edition (FES-4) to assess multiple dimensions of family environment. Children's receptive vocabulary was assessed with the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test–Fourth Edition, and their receptive language was assessed by an age-appropriate version of the Concepts and Following Directions subtest of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals and the Sentence Comprehension subscale of the Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language–Second Edition. Principal component analysis was used to examine the dimensional structure of the family environment. Results: Three higher order components were derived from FES-4 subscales for both families of children with SNHL and with TH: Supportive, Controlling, and Conflicted. However, the composition of the factors themselves differed between the two groups. For the TH group, most family environment measures on the FES-4 were not associated with language outcomes. In contrast, for children with SNHL, families who were more supportive, less controlling, and less conflicted had children with better language skills. Conclusions: Three well-accepted dimensions of family dynamics and functioning apply to families of children with SNHL, but their composition differs from those of families with TH children. Family environmental dynamics were much more strongly associated with language outcomes in children with SNHL than in their TH peers. The spoken language development of children with SNHL, in particular, is better in families that provide high levels of support for each other and, in particular, low levels of control, disorganization, and conflict, reflecting the fragile nature of their spoken language development.

scholarly journals È possibile predire nell’infanzia le capacità scolastiche e di linguaggio ad 11 anni: i risultati di uno studio di coorte in Australia

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 2
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Family Environment ◽  
Language Skills ◽  
School Achievement ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
The Family ◽  
National Tests

It is possible to predict school and language skills at age of 11: the results of a cohort study in Australia Early language skills are essential for preschool learning and subsequent school results, however it is not clear at what time it is possible to predict the subsequent difficulties in an optimal way early, for a timely intervention. This Australian study followed 1.910 children from the age of 7.5-10 months, collecting data on 12 risk factors associated with language development. A subgroup of 839 children was analyzed with full follow-up at 11 years, language assessment at 2, 4, 5, 7 years and evaluation of school results with national tests at 8, 10 and 12 years. Early risk factors were good predictors of school achievement at 11. Language proficiency at 4 years was the best predictor of language outcomes at 11 years. The need for early support to the family environment in the presence of risk factors is confirmed and the best time to decide the need for intervention on language development is identified at the age of 4.

Effects of Parents' Mealtime Conversation Techniques for Preschool Children With Hearing Loss Who Use Listening and Spoken Language

2021 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 979-992
Author(s):  
Elaine R. Smolen ◽  
Ye Wang ◽  
Maria C. Hartman ◽  
Young-Sun Lee
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Vocabulary Instruction ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Receptive Language ◽  
Receptive Vocabulary ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Standardized Measures ◽  
Basic Concepts ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
Explicit Vocabulary

Purpose This mixed-methods study aimed to examine the conversation techniques used by parents of young children with hearing loss (HL) during dinnertime at home. Parents' usage rates of open- and closed-ended language elicitation, reformulation, imitation, directives, and explicit vocabulary instruction were examined in relation to children's receptive vocabulary and basic-concepts skills. Method Twenty-minute dinnertime segments were extracted from naturalistic, daylong recordings of 37 preschoolers with HL who used listening and spoken language. The segments were hand-coded for parents' use of conversation techniques. Children's receptive vocabulary and basic concepts were assessed using standardized measures. Results Parents' use of conversation techniques varied widely, with closed-ended elicitation and directives used most frequently during dinner. Explicit vocabulary instruction was correlated with general receptive vocabulary and basic-concepts skills. Thematic analysis of the conversations revealed common themes, including concrete topics and sibling speakers. In addition, parents who used many techniques often introduced abstract conversation topics; electronic media was present in all conversations with few techniques. Conclusions Parents of preschoolers with HL may benefit from specific coaching to elicit language and introduce new vocabulary during home routines. These techniques may help develop their children's receptive language.

scholarly journals Contribution of Family Environment to Pediatric Cochlear Implant Users' Speech and Language Outcomes: Some Preliminary Findings

2012 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 848-864 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael Frush Holt ◽  
Jessica Beer ◽  
William G. Kronenberger ◽  
David B. Pisoni ◽  
Kaylah Lalonde
Keyword(s):  
Executive Function ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Family Environment ◽  
Clinical Population ◽  
Behavior Rating ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
The Family ◽  
Behavior Rating Inventory

PurposeTo evaluate the family environments of children with cochlear implants and to examine relationships between family environment and postimplant language development and executive function.MethodForty-five families of children with cochlear implants completed a self-report family environment questionnaire (Family Environment Scale—Fourth Edition; Moos & Moos, 2009) and an inventory of executive function (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function [Gioia, Isquith, Guy, & Kenworthy, 2000] or Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function—Preschool Version [Gioia, Espy, & Isquith, 2003]). The authors also evaluated children's receptive vocabulary (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test—Fourth Edition; Dunn & Dunn, 2007) and global language skills (Preschool Language Scale—Fourth Edition [Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 2002] and Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals—Fourth Edition [Semel, Wiig, & Secord, 2003]).ResultsThe family environments of children with cochlear implants differed from those of normal-hearing children but not in clinically significant ways. Language development and executive function were found to be atypical but not uncharacteristic of this clinical population. Families with higher levels of self-reported control had children with smaller vocabularies. Families reporting a higher emphasis on achievement had children with fewer executive function and working memory problems. Finally, families reporting a higher emphasis on organization had children with fewer problems related to inhibition.ConclusionSome of the variability in cochlear implantation outcomes that have protracted periods of development is related to family environment. Because family environment can be modified and enhanced by therapy or education, these preliminary findings hold promise for future work in helping families to create robust language-learning environments that can maximize their child's potential with a cochlear implant.

The Colorado Journey Towards Optimal Outcomes for Children With Hearing Loss

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Yoshinaga-Itano
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Diverse Population ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Maternal Bonding ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Optimal Outcomes ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

Abstract It is possible for children who are deaf or hard of hearing to attain language development comparable to their hearing peers, but these outcomes are not guaranteed. The population of children with hearing loss is a diverse population and although the variable of the age of identification is less variable, there are numerous variables that could potentially and have historically impacted language outcomes of children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Variables such as hearing loss, maternal level of education, and maternal bonding can overcome the benefits of earlier identification and intervention.

Does Access to Visual Input Inhibit Auditory Development for Children With Cochlear Implants? A Review of the Evidence

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (9) ◽  
pp. 10-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jena McDaniel ◽  
Stephen Camarata
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Sensory Deprivation ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Visual Input ◽  
Theoretical Argument ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Auditory Development ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
Multisensory Input

Purpose We review the evidence for attenuating visual input during intervention to enhance auditory development and ultimately improve spoken language outcomes in children with cochlear implants. Background Isolating the auditory sense is a long-standing tradition in many approaches for teaching children with hearing loss. However, the evidence base for this practice is surprisingly limited and not straightforward. We review four bodies of evidence that inform whether or not visual input inhibits auditory development in children with cochlear implants: (a) audiovisual benefits for speech perception and understanding for individuals with typical hearing, (b) audiovisual integration development in children with typical hearing, (c) sensory deprivation and neural plasticity, and (d) audiovisual processing in individuals with hearing loss. Conclusions Although there is a compelling theoretical rationale for reducing visual input to enhance auditory development, there is also a strong theoretical argument supporting simultaneous multisensory auditory and visual input to potentially enhance outcomes in children with hearing loss. Despite widespread and long-standing practice recommendations to limit visual input, there is a paucity of evidence supporting this recommendation and no evidence that simultaneous multisensory input is deleterious to children with cochlear implants. These findings have important implications for optimizing spoken language outcomes in children with cochlear implants.

Professionals’ Guidance About Spoken Language Multilingualism and Spoken Language Choice for Children With Hearing Loss

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Crowe ◽  
Sharynne McLeod
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Special Education Teachers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Language Choice ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Language Models ◽  
The Family ◽  
Teachers Of The Deaf ◽  
Family Language ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

The purpose of this research was to investigate factors that influence professionals’ guidance of parents of children with hearing loss regarding spoken language multilingualism and spoken language choice. Sixteen professionals who provide services to children and young people with hearing loss completed an online survey, rating the importance of a range of potential influences on the guidance they provide to parents. These participants were invited to comment on the importance of these influences. Participants included teachers of the deaf, speech-language pathologists, special education teachers, psychologists, auditory-verbal therapists, Auslan interpreters, and curriculum coordinators. All participants had experience working with multilingual families and reported that they would sometimes or always recommend multilingualism for children with hearing loss, with fewer reporting that they would sometimes recommend monolingualism. Professionals placed greater importance on factors relating to family and community considerations (e.g., family language models, communication within the family, community engagement), and less importance on organisational policy and children's characteristics. This research provides an initial insight into the factors that professionals consider when guiding parents around spoken language and spoken language multilingualism decision-making for their children with hearing loss.

scholarly journals PERKEMBANGAN FUNGSI PRAGMATIK PADA ANAK USIA 2,5 TAHUN (STUDI KASUS PADA AZZA AQILA JIHAN SYUASABITHA)

Kadera Bahasa ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-52
Author(s):  
Ali Kusno
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Social Environment ◽  
Family Environment ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Sensitive Period ◽  
Language Function ◽  
Biological Factors ◽  
Sensitive Periods ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Subject

The golden age of kid was a sensitive period. During this period, the kid was specially receiving the stimulant from theenvironment. The period of kid’s language development was various, dependent on the characteristics. This study relatedto the function development of kid’s language. The example case to the girl 2,5 years old, Azza Aqila Jihan Syuasabitha(Jihan). Jihan was growing in the family environment and child caring. The kid’s language was developing quickly. Theusage of language was devoted to Jihan’s interaction with family members. Collecting data method in this study was theobservation. The subject in this study was the child’s author. This study aimed to describe the development of Jihan’sspeech as child 2,5 years old based on the language function grouping according to M.A.K Halliday. The result of thestudy showed the kid can apply all of language function usage. Those are the instrumental, the regulatory, the interactional,the personal, the heuristic, the imaginative, and the representational. Therefore, she was interpreted has the ability aboveaverage the children the same age. The achievement was influenced by biological factors (parents who have good languageskills) and social environment (in the house, in the school, and so on) which can stimulate Jihan’s language development AbstrakMasa keemasan anak merupakan periode sensitif (sensitive periods). Selama masa tersebut anak secarakhusus mudah menerima stimulus-stimulus dari lingkungan. Tempo perkembangan bahasa anakcenderung variatif tergantung karakteristik anak. Penelitian ini berhubungan dengan perkembanganfungsi bahasa anak. Contoh kasus, Azza Aqila Jihan Syuasabitha (Jihan) anak perempuan yang berusia2,5 tahun. Jihan besar dalam lingkungan keluarga dan taman penitipan anak. Perkembangan fungsibahasanya pesat. Pemakaian bahasa dikhususkan pada interaksi Jihan dengan anggota keluarga.Pengumpulan data dalam penelitian dengan teknik pengamatan berperan serta. Subjek penelitian iniadalah anak penulis sendiri. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan perkembangan tuturanJihan sebagai anak yang berusia 2,5 tahun berdasarkan pengelompokan fungsi bahasa menurut M.A.KHalliday. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan anak itu mampu menerapkan keseluruhan fungsi penggunaanbahasa, yakni instrumental, regulatoris/dogmatis, interaksional, personal, heuristik, imajinatif, danrepresentasional. Dengan demikian, dapat diinterpretasikan bahwa anak itu memiliki kemampuan diatas rata-rata anak seumur dia. Pencapaian tersebut dipengaruhi oleh faktor biologis (orang tua yangmemang memiliki kemampuan berbahasa yang baik) dan lingkungan sosial (di rumah, sekolah, dantempat lain).

scholarly journals Conhecimento das famílias de crianças usuárias de implante coclear sobre o desenvolvimento de linguagem e condições do dispositivo

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Natália Caroline Rovere ◽  
Arthur Menino Castilho ◽  
Maria Cecília Marconi Pinheiro Lima
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Public Hospital ◽  
Receptive Language ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Language Therapy ◽  
Telephone Contact ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
The Family ◽  
Better Than

RESUMOObjetivo: Conhecer como as famílias de crianças surdas usuárias de Implante Coclear percebem o desenvolvimento de linguagem da criança e relacionar esses dados com o tempo de uso diário e a quebra do dispositivo. Métodos: Trata-se de pesquisa de caráter exploratório com abordagem quantitativa. Realizou-se um levantamento do número de crianças implantadas em um serviço de saúde auditiva de um hospital escola, entre 2013 e 2015 e para aqueles que aceitaram participar da pesquisa, aplicou-se entrevista e a Escala de Aquisições Iniciais de Linguagem (ELM) com um dos membros da família, sendo esta áudio-gravada, via contato telefônico. Resultados: Das 66 crianças implantadas neste período, 52 participaram da pesquisa, sendo que destas 51 utilizavam o dispositivo. Verificou-se que a maioria (90,4%) frequentava terapia fonoaudiológica e as famílias relataram que estimulam o desenvolvimento da linguagem das crianças em casa. Aquelas classificadas com desenvolvimento de linguagem típico receberam o implante coclear precocemente, utilizavam o implante coclear o dia todo e nunca tiveram o equipamento quebrado. Quanto à Escala ELM, foi encontrado que existem mais casos de desenvolvimento típico para linguagem receptiva do que para a expressiva. Conclusão: Houve relação entre o uso do dispositivo e o desenvolvimento típico e a quebra do equipamento com desenvolvimento atípico de linguagem. Os familiares referiram que a compreensão de linguagem encontra-se mais adequada do que a produção da fala. Descritores: Implante coclear; Surdez; Perda auditiva; Linguagem; Desenvolvimento infantil ABSTRACT Objective: To know as the families of deaf children with cochlear implants (CI) perceive their language development and the to relate this data with the time of daily use and problems in the device. Methods: The research was observational, exploratory, with quantitative approach. A survey of the number of patients implanted in a Hearing Health Service of a public hospital was done, between 2013 and 2015 and it was applied an interview and the Early language Milestone Scale with one of the family members, audio-recorded, through telephone contact. Results: Out of the 66 implanted children, 52 families participated in the research and 51 used the device. It was verified that most of the children (90.04%) were in speech and language therapy and the families stimulated language development at home. The children with typical language development got the IC early in life, used the device all day and the implant never broke. In the ELM scale, it was found that there are more cases of typical development for receptive language than for expressive. Conclusion: There was a relationship between the use of the device and typical language development and the problems in the device with atypical language development. The families see that the children show receptive language development better than the expressive language.Key words: Cochlear Implantation; Deafness; Hearing Loss; Language; Child Development

An Auditory Spoken Language Matrix for Differential Diagnosis of Spanish-Speaking Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

2011 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 71-78
Author(s):  
Kristin Uhler ◽  
Shannon M. Burns ◽  
Molly Dalpes ◽  
Christine Yoshinaga-Itano
Keyword(s):  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Auditory Evoked Potentials ◽  
Expressive Language ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Receptive Language ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
Language Input ◽  
Early Intervention System

A sample of children from Spanish-speaking homes who are hard-of-hearing demonstrated less than optimal outcomes following cochlear implantation. The authors developed a unique diagnostic protocol to identify potential causes. Inclusion criteria included hearing loss identified by 3 months of age, amplification, a Spanish-speaking home, and enrollment in the statewide early intervention system by 6-months of age. The authors collected extensive demographic data from participants, and the participants completed the same language assessments in 6-month time intervals, examining receptive and expressive language as well as parent-child interaction. Additional assessments included cortical auditory-evoked potentials (i.e., P1), infant speech perception, auditory skill questionnaires, and audio recordings taken over a 12–16 hour period in the child's natural language environment. This auditory spoken language matrix allowed identification of good auditory performers who performed poorly on expressive language measures and poor auditory performers with poor expressive and receptive language outcomes. The comprehensive nature of the assessment allowed examination of spoken language input and helped determine if poor language outcomes were associated with a lack of spoken language input (Hart & Risely, 1995). This matrix allowed the authors to rule out audibility, discrimination, auditory development, and quality of exposure to auditory spoken language as causes of delayed development. The article discusses additional benefits of using this protocol.

Outcomes for Children With HL: Effects of Age of ID, Sign Support, and Auditory Prosthesis

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Nittrouer
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
List Type ◽  
Auditory Prosthesis ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Independent Variables ◽  
Language Style ◽  
Language Input ◽  
Outcomes For Children

Abstract The purpose of the project reported here was to examine the effects of three independent variables on developmental outcomes for children with hearing loss (HL): age of identification of hearing loss, whether or not spoken language input was supported with signs and whether children used hearing aids (HAs) or cochlear implants (CI). Children with and without hearing loss were tested multiple times between 12 and 48 months of age, at their 6-month birthdays. Dependent variables were selected to examine all aspects of child development: receptive and expressive language, psychosocial components of personality, deleterious behaviors, adaptive behaviors, parental language style, and levels of parenting stress. Results support several main findings: None of the independent variables had any significant effect on any dependent variable unrelated to language. Mean levels of all language skills were delayed for all groups of children with HL, even those children identified at birth with only moderate losses that could be appropriately aided with HAs. For children with losses identified at birth, the use or nonuse of signs to support spoken language input did not affect language outcomes in the long run. Within the restricted range examined here, age of identification did not affect language outcomes, if children were not getting sign support; children with late-identified hearing loss receiving sign support were more delayed on all language measures than other children with HL. Regarding prosthesis, some experience using HAs was associated with better outcomes, even if children eventually received CIs. A parental language style that involved being very verbally responsive to the child's communicative attempts was strongly associated with positive language outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document