- F0,
- duration,
- intensity,
- hearing impairment
Abstract
The study intended to examine the acoustic features of stress F0, duration, and intensity in children using cochlear implants and compare these features with those in normal hearing children. Seven children with congenital profound hearing impairment fitted with multichannel cochlear implants and equal number of normal hearing children participated in the study. The participants narrated a picture depicting a 'living room' for about 2-3 minutes. The utterances were classified into separate intonation units and primary stressed syllable identified in each intonation unit. The stressed syllables were acoustically analyzed to measure duration, F0, and intensity using Praat software. The statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS version 12.0. The mean duration of primary stressed syllable in children with cochlear implant was 0.32 s (SD = 0.11) and in normal hearing children it was 0.19 s (SD = 0.08). The mean F0 in children with cochlear implant was 339.89 Hz (SD = 56.14) whereas in normal hearing children it was 306.37 Hz (SD = 51.21). The mean intensity was 80.83 dB (SD = 5.49) in children with cochlear implant and 83.51 dB (SD = 5.17) in normal hearing children. The independent samples t- test revealed significant difference between the two groups of participants for all acoustic measures. The results of the current study seem to suggest that children with cochlear implant distinctly produced sentence stress but the acoustic correlates of stress are significantly different from those produced by individuals with normal hearing. Hence, the results emphasize the need to consider inclusion of suprasegmental aspects in the speech-language rehabilitation of children with cochlear implant.
References
Angelocci, A., Kopp, G., & Holbrook, K. (1994). The vowel formants of deaf and normal hearing eleven to fourteen year old boys. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 29, 156-170.
Bzoch, K. R. & League, R. (1971). Receptive expressive emergent language scales. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Calvert, D. R. & Silverman, S. R. (1975). Speech and deafness. Washington, DC: Alexander Grahambell Association.
Chafe, W. (1987). Cognitive constraints on information flow. In R. Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and Grounding in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cruttenden, A. (1997). Intonation (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Forner, L. L. & Hixon, T. J. (1977). Respiratory kinematics in profoundly hearing-impaired speakers. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 20, 373-408.
Hargrove, P. (1997). Prosodic aspects of language impairment in children. Topics in Language Disorders, 17(4), 76-83.
Horii, Y. (1982). Some voice fundamental frequency characteristics of oral reading and spontaneous speech by hard of hearing young women. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 25, 608-610.
Hudgins, C. V., & Numbers, F. (1942). An investigation of the intelligibility of the speech of the deaf. Genetics and Psychology Monograph, 25, 289-392.
Iler-Kirk, K. & Edgerton, B. J. (1983). The effects of cochlear implant use on voice parameters. Otolaryngology Clinics of North America, 16, 281-292.
Leder, S. B., Spitzer, J. B., Milner, P., Flevaris-Phillips, C., Richardson, F., & Kirchner, J. C. (1986).
Reacquistion of contrastive stress in an adventitiously deaf speaker using a singlechannel cochlear implant. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 79, 1967-1974.
Lenden, J. M. & Flipsen, P. (2007). Prosody and voice characteristics of children with cochlear implants. Journal of Communication Disorders, 40, 66-81.
Martony, J. (1968). On the correction of the voice pitch level for severely hard of hearing subjects. American Annals of the Deaf, 113, 195-202.
McGarr, N. & Harris, K. (1980). Articulatory control in a deaf speaker. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, SR-63/64, 309- 322.
Nickerson, R. (1975). Characteristics of the speech of deaf persons. The Volta Review, 77, 342-362.
Osberger, M. & Levitt, H. (1979). The effect of timing errors on the intelligibility of deaf children's
speech. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 66, 1316-1324.
Shriberg, L. D., Kwiatkowski, J., & Rasmussen, C. (1990). ProsodyVoice Screening Profile (PVSP). Tuscon, AZ: Communication Skill Builders.
Stevens, K., Nickerson, R., & Rollins, A. (1978). On describing the suprasegmental properties of the speech of deaf children. In D. Mcpherson & M. Davids (Eds.), Advances in prosthetic devices for the deaf: A technical workshop (pp.134-155).Rochester, NY: National Technical Institute for the Deaf.
Te, G. O., Hamilton, M. J., Rizer, F. M., Schatz, K. A., Arkis, P. N., & Rose, H. C. (1996). Early speech changes in children with multichannel cochlear implants. Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 115 (6), 508-512.
Tobey, N., Angelette, S., Murchison, C., Nicosia, J., Sprague, S., Staller, S., Brimacombe, J. & Beiter, A. (1991). Speech production in children receiving a multi channel cochlear implant. American Journal of Otology, Supplement, 12,164-172.
Tye-Murray, N. (1987). Effects of vowel context on the articulatory closure postures of deaf speakers. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30, 99-104.
Tye-Murray, N. & Folkins, J. W. (1990). Jaw and lip movements of deaf talkers producing utterances with known stress patterns. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 87, 2675-2683.
Waters, T. (1986). Speech therapy with cochlear implant wearers. British Journal of Audiology, 20, 35-42