No abstract

Acoustic measurements have shown that the speech of hearing-impaired (HI) children differs from that of normally hearing (NH) children, even after several years of device use. This study focuses on the perception of HI speech in comparison to NH children's speech. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether adult listeners can identify the speech of NH and HI children. Moreover, it is studied whether listeners' experience and the children's length of device use play a role in that assessment. For this study, short utterances of 7 children with a cochlear implant (CI), 7 children with an acoustic hearing aid (HA) and 7 children with NH were presented to 90 listeners who were required to specify the hearing status of each speech sample. The judges had different degrees of familiarity with hearing disorders: there were 30 audiologists, 30 primary schoolteachers and 30 inexperienced listeners. The results show that the speech of children with NH and HI can reliably be identified. However, listeners do not manage to distinguish between children with CI and HA. Children with CI are increasingly identified as NH with increasing length of device use. For children with HA, there is no similar change with longer device use. Also, experienced listeners seem to display a more lenient attitude towards atypical speech, whereas inexperienced listeners are stricter and generally consider more utterances to be produced by children with HI.

Speaking intelligibly is an important achievement in children’s language development. How far do congenitally severe-to-profound hearing-impaired children who received a cochlear implant (CI) in the first two years of their life advance on the path to intelligibility in comparison to children with typical hearing (NH)? Spontaneous speech samples of children with CI and children with NH were orthographically transcribed by naïve transcribers. The entropy of the transcriptions was computed to analyze their degree of uniformity. The same samples were also rated on a continuous rating scale by another group of adult listeners. The transcriptions of the NH children’s speech were more uniform, i.e., had significantly lower entropy, than those of the CI children, suggesting that the latter group displayed lower intelligibility. This was confirmed by the ratings on the continuous scale. Despite the relatively restricted age ranges, older children reached better intelligibility scores in both groups.

No abstract

Studies on the speech and language development of hearing-impaired children often focus on (deviations in) the children’s speech production. However, it is unclear if listeners also perceive differences between the speech of normally hearing and hearing-impaired children. This contribution wants to fill this void by investigating the overall perceived speech quality of both groups. Three groups of listeners (speech and language pathologists, primary school teachers and inexperienced listeners) judged 126 utterances of seven normally hearing children, seven children with an acoustic hearing aid and seven children with a cochlear implant, in a comparative judgment task. All children were approximately seven years old and received, in the case of the hearing-impaired children, their assistive hearing device before the age of two. The online tool D-PAC was used to administer the comparative judgement task. The listeners compared stimuli in pairs and decided which stimulus sounded best. This method ultimately leads to a ranking in which all stimuli are represented according to their overall perceived speech quality. The main result is that the speech of normally hearing children was preferred by the listeners. This indicates that, even after several years of device use, the speech quality of hearing-impaired children is perceived as different from that of normally hearing children. Within the group of hearing-impaired children, cochlear implanted children were judged to exhibit higher speech quality than acoustically hearing aided children, especially after a longer device use. The speech quality of the latter group, on the other hand, remained practically stable. Listeners, irrespectively of their degree of experience with (hearing-impaired) children’s speech, completed the task similarly. In other words: the difference between the overall perceived speech quality of normally hearing and hearing-impaired children is salient for all listener groups and they all slightly preferred children with a cochlear implant over children with an acoustic hearing aid.