Impact of visual and auditory deprivation on speech perception and production in adults

Turgeon, Christine; Trudeau-Fisette, Pamela; Leporé, Franco; Lippé, Sarah; Ménard, Lucie

doi:10.1080/02699206.2020.1719207

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Burlingham (32) reported that blind babies indicate longer babbling phases, as well as delays in the production of their first words. It seems that blindness result in delayed morphologic, pragmatic, and lexical development compared with sighted children (10). The current study indicated that speech intelligibility (i.e., SIR score) in deaf-blind and deaf-only children improved as the duration of cochlear implant use increased.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the perceptual compensation hypothesis, sensory deprivation within one sensory system will stimulate compensatory perceptual alternations in another sensory system. In the case of early visual deprivation, there is some debate over whether blindness leads to an auditory system dysfunction or an enhancement in auditory performance (10). It seems that early-blind patients may show superior frequency discrimination and sound localization skills (21,22).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been shown that visible facial articulators (e.g., jaw or lips) will help humans to transmit important aspects of their speech, such as information regarding the place of articulation (e.g., nonbilabial vs. bilabial sounds) and roundedness of vowels and consonants (10). Certainly, adding visual cues to auditory information will assist normal-hearing subjects to perceive speech sounds more precisely, particularly when there is a competing signal in the environment and acoustic quality is poor (10,11). In such cases, visual cues provided by visible articulatory organs operate as functional cues that supplement the auditory information transmitted by the speech signal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Outcome of Cochlear Implantations in Deaf-Blind Patients: A Multicenter Observational Study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This multicenter study aimed to evaluate the auditory and speech outcomes of cochlear implantation (CI) in deaf-blind patients compared with deaf-only patients. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Multiple cochlear implant centers. Patients: The current study was conducted on 17 prelingual deaf-blind children and 12 postlingual deaf-blind adults who underwent CI surgery. As a control group, 17 prelingual deaf children and 12 postlingual deaf adults were selected. Intervention: Cochlear implantation. Main Outcome Measure(s): Auditory and linguistic performances in children were assessed using the categories of auditory performance (CAP) and Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) scales, respectively. The word recognition score (WRS) was also used to measure speech perception ability in adults. The mean CAP, SIR, and WRS cores were compared between the deaf-only and deaf-blind groups before CI surgery and at "12 months" and "24 months" after device activation. Cohen's d was used for effect size estimation. Results: We found no significant differences in the mean CAP and SIR scores between the deaf-blind and deaf-only children before the CI surgery. For both groups, SIR and CAP scores improved with increasing time after the device activation. The mean CAP scores in the deaf-only children were either equivalent or slightly higher than those of the deaf-blind children at "12 months post-CI" (3.94 ± 0.74 vs 3.24 ± 1.25; mean difference score, 0.706) and "24 months post-CI" (6.01 ± 0.79 vs 5.47 ± 1.06; mean difference score, 0.529) time intervals, but these differences were not statistically significant. The SIR scores in deaf-only implanted children were, on average, 0.870 scores greater than the deaf-blind children at "12 months post-CI" (2.94 ± 0.55 vs 2.07 ± 1.4; p = 0.01, d = 0.97) and, on average, 1.067 scores greater than deaf-blind children at "24 months post-CI" (4.35 ± 0.49 vs 3.29 ± 1.20; p = 0.002; d = 1.15) time intervals. We also found an improvement in WRS scores from the "preimplantation" to the "12-month post-CI" and "24-month post-CI" time intervals in both groups. Pairwise comparisons indicated that the mean WRS in the deaf-only adults was, on average, 10.61% better than deaf-blind implanted adults at "12 months post-CI" (62.33 ± 9.09% vs 51.71 ± 10.73%, p = 0.034, d = 1.06) and, on average, 15.81% better than deaf-blind adults at "24-months post-CI" (72.67 ± 8.66% vs 56.8 ± 9.78%, p = 0.002, d = 1.61) follow-ups. Conclusion: Cochlear implantation is a beneficial method for the rehabilitation of deaf-blind patients. Both deaf-blind and deaf-only implanted children revealed similar auditory performances. However, speech perception ability in deaf-blind patients was slightly lower than the deaf-only patients in both children and adults.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Outcome of Cochlear Implantations in Deaf-Blind Patients: A Multicenter Observational Study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While visual input has been established to play an important role in speech perception, its possible role in the sensorimotor processes governing the production of speech sounds is less well understood. A role for vision in speech motor development is evidenced by studies of early blind individuals, who show differences from sighted individuals in the control of oral speech movements under a variety of speaking conditions, including simple vowel production (M enard et al, 2009;Turgeon et al, 2020) and fast or clear speech (M enard et al, 2016a; M enard et al, 2016b), and in response to sensory perturbations impacting speech production (M enard et al, 2016c;Trudeau-Fisette et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual feedback of the tongue influences speech adaptation to a physical modification of the oral cavity

Barbier

Merzouki

Bal

et al. 2021

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies examining sensorimotor adaptation of speech to changing sensory conditions have demonstrated a central role for both auditory and somatosensory feedback in speech motor learning. The potential influence of visual feedback of oral articulators, which is not typically available during speech production but may nonetheless enhance oral motor control, remains poorly understood. The present study explores the influence of ultrasound visual feedback of the tongue on adaptation of speech production (focusing on the sound /s/) to a physical perturbation of the oral articulators (prosthesis altering the shape of the hard palate). Two visual feedback groups were tested that differed in the two-dimensional plane being imaged (coronal or sagittal) during practice producing /s/ words, along with a no-visual-feedback control group. Participants in the coronal condition were found to adapt their speech production across a broader range of acoustic spectral moments and syllable contexts than the no-feedback controls. In contrast, the sagittal group showed reduced adaptation compared to no-feedback controls. The results indicate that real-time visual feedback of the tongue is spontaneously integrated during speech motor adaptation, with effects that can enhance or interfere with oral motor learning depending on compatibility of the visual articulatory information with requirements of the speaking task. V

show abstract

Impact of visual and auditory deprivation on speech perception and production in adults

Cited by 2 publications

References 66 publications

The Outcome of Cochlear Implantations in Deaf-Blind Patients: A Multicenter Observational Study

The Outcome of Cochlear Implantations in Deaf-Blind Patients: A Multicenter Observational Study

Visual feedback of the tongue influences speech adaptation to a physical modification of the oral cavity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About