Measuring listening effort expended by adolescents and young adults with unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants or normal hearing

Hughes, Kathryn Clare; Galvin, Karyn L.

doi:10.1179/1754762812y.0000000009

Cited by 93 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Stokes (2010) suggests that words from dense neighborhoods tend to be acquired earlier than those from sparse neighborhoods because adults tend to hyper-articulate words from dense neighborhoods to avoid confusions, which consequently makes words from dense neighborhoods more salient. Due to the bilateral advantage on speech perception (Grieco-Calub & Litovsky, 2012; Hughes & Galvin, 2013; Lovett, Kitterick, Hewitt, & Summerfield, 2010), children with bilateral CIs may be able to benefit from these hyper-articulated patterns more than children with unilateral CIs do.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If binaural input enhances perception of acoustic information (Grieco-Calub & Litovsky, 2012; Lovett et al, 2010), children with bilateral CIs may process the sound sequence of words in greater detail and thus demonstrate stronger sensitivity to word statistics than children with unilateral CIs. Moreover, binaural processing may reduce listening effort (Hughes & Galvin, 2013), which allows children with bilateral CIs to allocate more attention and/or other cognitive resources to the process of lexical acquisition (Houston et al, 2003; Just & Carpenter, 1992). In fact, it has been suggested that early auditory experience can affect the development of general cognitive processes that are not even specific to audition or spoken language (Conway, Pisoni, & Kronenberger, 2009; Houston et al, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whether or not it is the case that the two groups differ in vocabulary size, our greater interest was whether the pattern of relationships between the number of words in the spoken lexicon and the statistical characteristics of the vocabulary words in the spoken lexicon reveal normal processes of word learning. It is possible that bilateral processing may reduce the listening effort (Hughes & Galvin, 2013), which allows children with bilateral CIs to allocate more attention and/or other cognitive resources to the process of lexical acquisition (Houston et al, 2003). Thus, children with bilateral CIs may process the sound sequence of words in a greater detail, and hence demonstrate stronger sensitivity to word statistics, than children with unilateral CIs.…”

Section: Language Outcomes In Children With Unilateral Versus Bilatermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Are Young Children With Cochlear Implants Sensitive to the Statistics of Words in the Ambient Spoken Language?

Guo

McGregor

Spencer

2015

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To determine whether children with cochlear implants (CIs) are sensitive to statistical characteristics of words in the ambient spoken language, whether that sensitivity changes in expected ways as their spoken lexicon grows, and whether that sensitivity varies with unilateral or bilateral implantation. Method We analyzed archival data collected from the parents of 36 children who received cochlear implantation (20 unilateral, 16 bilateral) before 24 months of age. The parents reported their children’s word productions 12 months after implantation using the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories: Words and Sentences (Fenson et al., 1993). We computed the number of words, out of 292 possible monosyllabic nouns, verbs, and adjectives, that each child was reported to say and calculated the average phonotactic probability, neighborhood density, and word frequency of the reported words. Results Spoken vocabulary size positively correlated with average phonotactic probability and negatively correlated with average neighborhood density, but only in children with bilateral CIs. Conclusion At 12 months post-implantation, children with bilateral CIs demonstrate sensitivity to statistical characteristics of words in the ambient spoken language akin to that reported for hearing children during the early stages of lexical development. Children with unilateral CIs do not.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Language Outcomes In Children With Unilateral Versus Bilatermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are Young Children With Cochlear Implants Sensitive to the Statistics of Words in the Ambient Spoken Language?

Guo

McGregor

Spencer

2015

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, there are only a handful of published studies on listening effort with teen-age or pediatric participants (e.g., Choi et al 2008;Howard et al 2010;Hughes & Galvin 2013;Gustafson et al 2014). Moreover, since children experience significant linguistic and cognitive maturation during their elementary school years (e.g., Cartwright 2002;Piaget & Inhelder 2008), the same behavioural paradigm may yield different patterns of results between children and adults.…”

Section: School-age Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Listening Effort Through Depth of Processing in School-Age Children

Hsu

Vanpoucke²,

Wieringen

2017

Ear &Amp; Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: A reliable measure of listening effort is crucial for helping children with communication disorders. In this paper, we propose a novel behavioural paradigm designed to measure listening effort in school-age children and present the results of its validation in a group of normal-hearing children. The paradigm consists of a classic word recognition task in quiet and noise coupled to one of three categorization tasks requiring the children to judge either the color of two pictures or the meaning of the presented words. The response time from the categorization tasks is considered the primary indicator of listening effort. Design:The listening effort paradigm was evaluated in a group of 31 normal-hearing children 7 to 12 years of age without any history of language or developmental disorders. Custom software was developed to allow administration of the entire paradigm from a conventional laptop computer. A separate touch screen was used as a response interface to gather response time (RT) data from the children. All verbal responses were judged from an experienced tester in order to produce a word recognition score (WRS) for each condition. The software presented randomized lists of 146 selected Dutch nouns in one of three signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) to examine the potential effect of noise on both WRS and RT. Three distinct categorization tasks were also developed to examine how different depths of semantic processing would affect the two outcome measures of WRS and RT. It was hypothesized that, while listening effort as measured by RT would be affected by both noise level and the depth of semantic processing, WRS performance would be affected by changes in noise level only.Results: There was a significant effect of SNR level on school-age children's WRS: their word recognition performance tended to decrease with increasing background noise level. However, depth of processing did not appear to affect WRS. Moreover, a repeated-measure analysis of variance (rANOVA) fitted to transformed RT data revealed that this measure of listening effort in normal-hearing school-age children was significantly affected by both SNR level and the depth of semantic processing. There was no significant interaction between noise level and the type of categorization task with regard to RT. Conclusion:The patterns of WRS and RT as observed in our data sets provided support for our general hypothesis regarding the effects of background noise and semantic processing level on speech understanding and listening effort. Even though the magnitude of change in listening effort did not differ between the three novel categorization tasks, the exploratory nature of the current study warranted further evaluation of processing depths as a potential listening effort assessment paradigm in both normal-hearing and hearing-impaired populations.

show abstract

“…When one task becomes more difficult, in this case trying to understand speech that is both degraded and mixed with competing noise, additional effort is necessary to maintain performance. Neurocognitive measures have been employed recently to assess the information processing workload demands required for listening to speech in background noise for CI listeners [70,71] and normal hearing participants under CI simulation [72]. Some of these behavioral measures rely on self-report [73], speed of processing [74,75], physiological responses such as pupillometry [77], or "dual-task" methodologies to assess listening effort and mental workload [78][79].…”

Section: Speech In Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

Some observations about cochlear implants: challenges and future directions

Faulkner¹,

Pisoni²

2013

Neurosci Discov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At the present time, cochlear implantation is the only available medical intervention for patients with profound hearing loss and is considered the "standard of care" for both prelingually deaf infants and post-lingually deaf adults. It has been suggested recently that cochlear implants are one of the greatest accomplishments of auditory neuroscience. Despite the enormous success of cochlear implantation for the treatment of profound deafness, especially in young prelingually deaf children, several pressing unresolved clinical issues have emerged that are at the forefront of current research efforts in the field. In this commentary we briefly review how a cochlear implant works and then discuss five of the most critical clinical and basic research issues: (1) individual differences in outcome and benefit, (2) speech perception in noise, (3) music perception, (4) neuroplasticity and perceptual learning, and (5) binaural hearing.

show abstract

Measuring listening effort expended by adolescents and young adults with unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants or normal hearing

Cited by 93 publications

References 31 publications

Are Young Children With Cochlear Implants Sensitive to the Statistics of Words in the Ambient Spoken Language?

Are Young Children With Cochlear Implants Sensitive to the Statistics of Words in the Ambient Spoken Language?

Listening Effort Through Depth of Processing in School-Age Children

Some observations about cochlear implants: challenges and future directions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About