Perception of time-altered monosyllables in a specific group of phonologically disordered children

DeMarco, Salvatore; Harbour, Anne; Hume, W.Garrett; Givens, Gregg D.

doi:10.1016/0028-3932(89)90122-x

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings of this study support the definition of APD as a disorder that is specific to the auditory modality (ASHA, 1996) and do not support an alternate theory that APD is a manifestation of impaired attention (Burd & Fisher, 1986;DeMarco, Harbour, Hume & Givens, 1989;Robin, Tomblin, Kearney & Hugg, 1989) or that APD and attentional deficits reflect a single developmental disorder (Gascon, Johnson & Burd, 1986;Cook et al, 1993).…”

Section: The Predictive Ability Of the Other Instrumentscontrasting

confidence: 56%

Evaluation of Screening Instruments for Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) in a Sample of Referred Children

Sanchez¹,

Lam²

2007

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Predictive Ability Of the Other Instrumentscontrasting

confidence: 56%

Evaluation of Screening Instruments for Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) in a Sample of Referred Children

Sanchez¹,

Lam²

2007

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…If poor reading is linked to an auditory temporal processing deficit then it might be difficult for children to hear those acoustic changes in speech sounds underlying appropriate g-p correspondences (Tallal, 1980 ;De Weirdt, 1988 ;De Marco et al, 1989 ;Reed, 1989 ;Wright et al, 1997). As early as 1975, Tallal and Piercy showed that the poor performance of dysphasics on stop c-v syllables was due to an impaired ability to process a transitional component of auditory information or to the short duration of the stimulus presentation .…”

Section: Behavioral Evidence For and Against Auditory Temporal Proces...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory Temporal Processing and Lexical/Nonlexical Reading in Developmental Dyslexics

Cestnick

Jerger²

2000

J Am Acad Audiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationships between lexical/nonlexical reading and auditory temporal processing were examined. Poor nonlexical readers (poor nonword readers, phonologic dyslexics) had difficulty across tone tasks irrespective of speed of presentation or mode of recall. Poor lexical readers (poor irregular word readers, surface dyslexics) had difficulty recalling tones in a sequence only when they were presented rapidly. Covariate analysis supported these findings, revealing that nonlexical (nonword) reading performance is associated with general auditory performance, but lexical (irregular word) reading is particularly associated with auditory sequencing. These findings suggest that phonologic and surface dyslexics perform differently on nonspeech auditory tasks. Because the two different types of poor readers did not differ significantly on tests of memory and learning but did differ on auditory tasks, we suggest that their performance on the auditory tasks may reflect auditory processing abnormalities as opposed to more general learning or memory difficulties. In addition to these observed qualitative differences between groups on the tone tasks, collapsing groups (all readers) revealed significant correlations between nonword reading and the Same-Different tone tasks in particular, whereas irregular word reading was not associated with any tone tasks; there also appears to be a quantitative relationship between nonlexical reading and Same-Different tone task performance as better or worse nonword reading predicts better or worse performance on the Same-Different tone tasks. In particular, it is conceivable that an auditory temporal processing deficit might contribute to poor nonword reading. Abbreviations: c-v = consonant-vowel, g-p = grapheme to phoneme, ISI = interstimulus interval, MMF = magnetic mismatch field, TOMAL = Test of Memory and Learning

show abstract

Auditory Performance Characteristics of the Computerized Revised Token Test (CRTT)

Eberwein

Pratt

McNeil

et al. 2007

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Young listeners require limited signal gain on the CRTT to achieve maximum performance. Time and frequency compression and expansion results were consistent with previous findings with varying types of speech stimuli. The results have implications for administration and interpretation of the CRTT administered to persons from other populations and will help in the development of a normative database for the CRTT.

show abstract

Perception of time-altered monosyllables in a specific group of phonologically disordered children

Cited by 5 publications

References 14 publications

Evaluation of Screening Instruments for Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) in a Sample of Referred Children

Evaluation of Screening Instruments for Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) in a Sample of Referred Children

Auditory Temporal Processing and Lexical/Nonlexical Reading in Developmental Dyslexics

Auditory Performance Characteristics of the Computerized Revised Token Test (CRTT)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About