Do Acoustic Environment Characteristics Affect the Lexical Development of Children With Cochlear Implants? A Longitudinal Study Before and After Cochlear Implant Activation

Majorano, Marinella; Brondino, Margherita; Guerzoni, Letizia; Murri, Alessandra; Ferrari, Rachele; Lavelli, Manuela; Cuda, Domenico; Yoshinaga-Itano, Christine; Morelli, Marika; Persici, Valentina

doi:10.1044/2021_aja-20-00104

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We expected children with CIs to produce fewer initiatives and adequate responses than their age-matched NH peers and to have a performance mostly in line with that of younger, language-matched NH peers. In line with their language quantity and quality developmental trajectories (reported in Majorano et al, 2020, 2021), we further expected the children with CIs tested to significantly improve their communicative behavior over time, but to still lag behind their age-matched NH peers 12 months after implantation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Bidirectional language influence in mother–child interaction and its effects on the communicative development of children with cochlear implants: A longitudinal study

Persici¹,

Morelli²,

Lavelli³

et al. 2022

First Language

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aimed to investigate the communicative characteristics of children with cochlear implants (CIs) and their mothers in interaction, whether and how they differ from those of mother–child dyads with normal hearing, and whether mother and child influence each other over the first year after implantation. Eighteen Italian-speaking children with CIs were assessed longitudinally across four time points, from before implantation (ages: 10–33 months) to 1 year after implantation. Two groups of normally-hearing children matched for age or lexical production level were used as comparison groups. The language used by mothers in semi-structured play sessions with their children was analyzed for use of specific techniques aimed at eliciting language in children with CIs (or Facilitating Language Techniques [FLTs]: questions, labeling, comments, parallel talk, reformulations, and directives); children’s language was analyzed for communicative functions (initiatives and adequate responses). Results showed delayed communicative development for children with CIs with respect to both control groups and different use of FLTs such as directives between mothers of children with or without normal hearing. Findings also highlighted an effect of the interlocutor’s communicative behavior for both children and mothers: In the group of children with CIs, children’s initiatives were hindered by a higher use of questions; mothers’ labeling was negatively affected by children’s responsivity. Findings may have important implications for language development support programs, families, and professionals.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Bidirectional language influence in mother–child interaction and its effects on the communicative development of children with cochlear implants: A longitudinal study

Persici¹,

Morelli²,

Lavelli³

et al. 2022

First Language

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Variability in accessibility may affect language outcomes. In a study that used data logging from cochlear implants, the amount of speech in quiet processed by children's implants correlated with their language outcomes, but the amount of speech in noise did not (Majorano et al, 2021), suggesting that speech in noise was inaccessible and did not contribute to language development. Also, noise in the home correlates with reduced conversational turns in children with cochlear implants (Wang et al, 2021) and children with hearing aids (Ambrose et al, 2014).…”

Section: Accessibility Of Language Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Children with cochlear implants have access to sound, but only when the external components of the implants are worn. The number of hours per day that children wear their implants varied considerably among socioeconomically diverse families in Italy (Majorano et al, 2021). Moreover, although cochlear implants provide access to sound when they are worn, the resulting auditory thresholds are still higher and more variable than what they are for children with typical hearing (Peixoto et al, 2013).…”

Section: Accessibility Of Language Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for understanding the relation between spoken language input and outcomes for children with cochlear implants

Houston

2022

Child Dev Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spoken language outcomes after cochlear implantation are highly variable. Some variance can be attributed to individual characteristics. Research with typically hearing children suggests that the amount of language directed to children may also play a role. However, several moderating factors may complicate the association between language input and language outcomes in children with cochlear implants. In this article, I present a conceptual framework that posits that the association between total language input directed to children and language outcomes is moderated by factors that influence what is accessible, attended to, and coordinated with the child. The framework also posits that children with cochlear implants exhibit more variability on those moderating factors, which explains why the relation between language input and language outcomes may be more complex even if language input is more important for successful language outcomes in this population. K E Y W O R D S cochlear implants, deaf children, hard-of-hearing children, language inputHow to cite this article: Houston, D. M. (2022). A framework for understanding the relation between spoken language input and outcomes for children with cochlear implants. Child Development Perspectives, 16,[60][61][62][63][64][65][66]

show abstract

“…There are additional issues inherent to the hardware such as electrode interaction and interaural mismatch, as well as physiological aspects such as irregular neuronal survival, that together result in a highly degraded auditory signal from which pre-lingual implantees must nevertheless learn speech and language. CIs also only restore the sensation of hearing when the devices are being worn, and children vary greatly in the number of hours of typical device use (Ganek, Cushing, Papsin, & Gordon, 2020;Majorano et al, 2021). Thus, both auditory absence pre-implantation and signal degradation post-implantation characterize the listening experiences of children with CIs.…”

Section: How Cochlear Implantation Might Shape the Early Language Env...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The everyday speech environments of preschoolers with and without cochlear implants

Cychosz¹,

Edwards²,

Munson³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Children with severe to profound deafness who receive cochlear implants develop speech and language on a protracted timescale, owing to the absence of auditory input pre-implantation, and the degraded speech signal transmitted by the cochlear implant post-implantation. The home environment facilitates children’s speech-language development, yet it is relatively unknown how the home environment differs between children with cochlear implants and children with typical hearing. This study asked how hearing status impacts the everyday speech-language environments of preschoolers with cochlear implants, compared to their peers with typical hearing.Method: Eighteen children with cochlear implants (31-65 months) were matched by chronological age and hearing age to two groups of children with typical-hearing. Each child completed a long-form, naturalistic audio recording of their home language environment (appx. 16 hrs/child; >730 hours of observation) to evaluate the impact of hearing status upon early speech-language experience: speech input from adults, child vocal productivity, and caregiver-child interaction. The quantity, consistency, and experience-related growth of each component was computed and compared across hearing groups. We additionally assessed how measures of the environment predicted the children’s speech outcomes.Results: Unlike children with typical hearing, children with implants do not hear more speech input from caregivers as they age, and measures of the speech environment (words, interaction) do not predict their vocal outcomes as strongly. Nevertheless, all children, regardless of hearing status, engage in similar amounts of caregiver interaction. All children’s own speech production matures with age, but at a much slower rate for children with implants than hearing age matched controls. All children produce more contingent speech in response to louder caregiver input.Conclusions: Children with cochlear implants are exposed to and engage in similar amounts of language with caregivers as children with typical hearing. However, over development, the at-home speech environment does not appear to reflect developmental stages as closely for children with implants as those with typical hearing. Home-based language interventions should focus on the unique input-outcome relationships for this group of children with hearing loss.

show abstract

Do Acoustic Environment Characteristics Affect the Lexical Development of Children With Cochlear Implants? A Longitudinal Study Before and After Cochlear Implant Activation

Cited by 8 publications

References 75 publications

Bidirectional language influence in mother–child interaction and its effects on the communicative development of children with cochlear implants: A longitudinal study

Bidirectional language influence in mother–child interaction and its effects on the communicative development of children with cochlear implants: A longitudinal study

A framework for understanding the relation between spoken language input and outcomes for children with cochlear implants

The everyday speech environments of preschoolers with and without cochlear implants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About