“Everyone Has a Right to, Like, Check Their Box:” Findings on a Measure of Gender Identity from a Cognitive Testing Study with Adolescents

Purpose The study sets out to investigate inter- and intraspeaker variation in German infant-directed speech (IDS) and considers the potential impact that the factors gender, parental involvement, and speech material (read vs. spontaneous speech) may have. In addition, we analyze data from 3 time points prior to and after the birth of the child to examine potential changes in the features of IDS and, particularly also, of adult-directed speech (ADS). Here, the gender identity of a speaker is considered as an additional factor. Method IDS and ADS data from 34 participants (15 mothers, 19 fathers) is gathered by means of a reading and a picture description task. For IDS, 2 recordings were made when the baby was approximately 6 and 9 months old, respectively. For ADS, an additional recording was made before the baby was born. Phonetic analyses comprise mean fundamental frequency (f0), variation in f0, the 1st 2 formants measured in /i: ɛ a u:/, and the vowel space size. Moreover, social and behavioral data were gathered regarding parental involvement and gender identity. Results German IDS is characterized by an increase in mean f0, a larger variation in f0, vowel- and formant-specific differences, and a larger acoustic vowel space. No effect of gender or parental involvement was found. Also, the phonetic features of IDS were found in both spontaneous and read speech. Regarding ADS, changes in vowel space size in some of the fathers and in mean f0 in mothers were found. Conclusion Phonetic features of German IDS are robust with respect to the factors gender, parental involvement, speech material (read vs. spontaneous speech), and time. Some phonetic features of ADS changed within the child's first year depending on gender and parental involvement/gender identity. Thus, further research on IDS needs to address also potential changes in ADS.

Download Full-text

The Impact of Subjective and Objective Hearing Loss on Cognition and Memory in Older Adults

Perspectives on Gerontology ◽

10.1044/gero20.2.49 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 20 (2) ◽

pp. 49-57 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Yvonne Rogalski ◽

Amy Rominger

Keyword(s):

Older Adults ◽

Hearing Loss ◽

Reading Aloud ◽

Cognitive Testing ◽

Professional Collaboration ◽

Cognitive Screening ◽

Speech Language Pathologist ◽

Text Passage ◽

The Impact ◽

Audiologic Evaluation

For this exploratory cross-disciplinary study, a speech-language pathologist and an audiologist collaborated to investigate the effects of objective and subjective hearing loss on cognition and memory in 11 older adults without hearing loss (OAs), 6 older adults with unaided hearing loss (HLOAs), and 16 young adults (YAs). All participants received cognitive testing and a complete audiologic evaluation including a subjective questionnaire about perceived hearing difficulty. Memory testing involved listening to or reading aloud a text passage then verbally recalling the information. Key findings revealed that objective hearing loss and subjective hearing loss were correlated and both were associated with a cognitive screening test. Potential clinical implications are discussed and include a need for more cross-professional collaboration in assessing older adults with hearing loss.

Download Full-text

Reflections on the Cognitive Interviewing Reporting Framework

Methodology ◽

10.1027/1614-2241/a000074 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 9 (3) ◽

pp. 123-128 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Gordon Willis ◽

Hennie Boeije

Keyword(s):

Research Design ◽

Cognitive Testing ◽

Level Of Detail ◽

Cognitive Interviewing ◽

Research Groups ◽

Research Project ◽

Reporting Framework ◽

Full Explanation ◽

Key Steps

Based on the experiences of three research groups using and evaluating the Cognitive Interviewing Reporting Framework (CIRF), we draw conclusions about the utility of the CIRF as a guide to creating cognitive testing reports. Authors generally found the CIRF checklist to be usable, and that it led to a more complete description of key steps involved. However, despite the explicit direction by the CIRF to include a full explanation of major steps and features (e.g., research objectives and research design), the three cognitive testing reports tended to simply state what was done, without further justification. Authors varied in their judgments concerning whether the CIRF requires the appropriate level of detail. Overall, we believe that current cognitive interviewing practice will benefit from including, within cognitive testing reports, the 10 categories of information specified by the CIRF. Future use of the CIRF may serve to direct the overall research project from the start, and to further the goal of evaluation of specific cognitive interviewing procedures.

Download Full-text