Prosody Perception and Production in Children with Hearing Loss and Age- and Gender-Matched Controls
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Auditory development in children with hearing loss, including the perception of prosody, depends on having adequate input from cochlear implants and/or hearing aids. Lack of adequate auditory stimulation can lead to delayed speech and language development. Nevertheless, prosody perception and production in people with hearing loss have received less attention than other aspects of language. The perception of auditory information conveyed through prosody using variations in the pitch, amplitude, and duration of speech is not usually evaluated clinically. PURPOSE: This study (1) compared prosody perception and production abilities in children with hearing loss and children with normal hearing; and (2) investigated the effect of age, hearing level, and musicality on prosody perception. RESEARCH DESIGN: Participants were 16 children with hearing loss and 16 typically developing controls matched for age and gender. Fifteen of the children with hearing loss were tested while using amplification (n = 9 hearing aids, n = 6 cochlear implants). Six receptive subtests of the Profiling Elements of Prosody in Speech-Communication (PEPS-C), the Child Paralanguage subtest of Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy 2 (DANVA 2), and Contour and Interval subtests of the Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Amusia (MBEA) were used. Audio recordings of the children's reading samples were rated using a perceptual prosody rating scale by nine experienced listeners who were blinded to the children's hearing status. STUDY SAMPLE: Thirty two children, 16 with hearing loss (mean age = 8.71 yr) and 16 age- and gender-matched typically developing children with normal hearing (mean age = 8.87 yr). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Assessments were completed in one session lasting 1-2 hours in a quiet room. Test items were presented using a laptop computer through loudspeaker at a comfortable listening level. For children with hearing loss using hearing instruments, all tests were completed with hearing devices set at their everyday listening setting. RESULTS: All PEPS-C subtests and total scores were significantly lower for children with hearing loss compared to controls (p < 0.05). The hearing loss group performed more poorly than the control group in recognizing happy, sad, and fearful emotions in the DANVA 2 subtest. Musicality (composite MBEA scores and musical experience) was significantly correlated with prosody perception scores, but this link was not evident in the regression analyses. Regression modeling showed that age and hearing level (better ear pure-tone average) accounted for 55.4% and 56.7% of the variance in PEPS-C and DANVA 2 total scores, respectively. There was greater variability for the ratings of pitch, pitch variation, and overall impression of prosody in the hearing loss group compared to control group. Prosody perception (PEPS-C and DANVA 2 total scores) and ratings of prosody production were not correlated. CONCLUSIONS: Children with hearing loss aged 7-12 yr had significant difficulties in understanding different aspects of prosody and were rated as having more atypical prosody overall than controls. These findings suggest that clinical assessment and speech-language therapy services for children with hearing loss should be expanded to target prosodic difficulties. Future studies should investigate whether musical training is beneficial for improving receptive prosody skills.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».