Time-Gated Word Recognition in Children: Effects of Auditory Access, Age, and Semantic Context

Abstract

Purpose We employed a time-gated word recognition task to investigate how children who are hard of hearing (CHH) and children with normal hearing (CNH) combine cognitive–linguistic abilities and acoustic–phonetic cues to recognize words in sentence-final position. Method The current study included 40 CHH and 30 CNH in 1st or 3rd grade. Participants completed vocabulary and working memory tests and a time-gated word recognition task consisting of 14 high- and 14 low-predictability sentences. A time-to-event model was used to evaluate the effect of the independent variables (age, hearing status, predictability) on word recognition. Mediation models were used to examine the associations between the independent variables (vocabulary size and working memory), aided audibility, and word recognition. Results Gated words were identified significantly earlier for high-predictability than low-predictability sentences. First-grade CHH and CNH showed no significant difference in performance. Third-grade CHH needed more information than CNH to identify final words. Aided audibility was associated with word recognition. This association was fully mediated by vocabulary size but not working memory. Conclusions Both CHH and CNH benefited from the addition of semantic context. Interventions that focus on consistent aided audibility and vocabulary may enhance children's ability to fill in gaps in incoming messages.

Auditory processing in children: Role of working memory and lexical ability in auditory closure

“…Children with a larger lexicon performed significantly better in restoring words in sentences regardless of their working memory and attention control abilities. This specific finding is also consistent with results of Walker and colleagues [ 49 ] who studied time-gated speech recognition in children with mild to moderate hearing loss. Walker et al [ 49 ] found that vocabulary, not children’s verbal WMC, mediated the relation between audibility and time-gated word recognition.…”

“…An interesting additional finding was that there was no interaction between lexical context and modality, which suggested that when listening in noise, lexical factors did not significantly advantage speech perception in the audio-visual condition. Recently, Walker and colleagues [ 49 ] examined the role of working memory and vocabulary on time-gated word recognition in children with hearing loss. They found that lexical knowledge, not working memory capacity, mediated the relationship between audibility and recognition of time-gated words.…”

“…The main prediction was that children’s auditory closure ability would be significantly influenced by lexical knowledge and their ability to accurately retrieve activated words from LTM. Based on previous studies in adults [ 13 ] and children [ 49 ] we predicted that cognitive mechanisms such as working memory and attention control may not be directly related to auditory closure ability in children.…”

Rethinking Emergent Literacy in Children With Hearing Loss

“…To this end, though improving vocabulary knowledge for children who use CIs is necessary for future literacy success (Lund, 2016), doing so may not lead to phonological awareness gains. It is possible that vocabulary could mediate the relationship between auditory access and phonological sensitivity (as it appears to do for children who are hearing aid users, see Walker et al, 2019), which would also explain the correlations between vocabulary and phonological sensitivity found in school-aged children who use CIs. We suggest that in the event that vocabulary does serve as a mediator, it does so after children have passed through the prereading stage, when they have learned more words.…”

“…The reality, however, is that many children continue to have reduced auditory access. For example, only half of the sample of CI users achieve full-time use (indexed as 80% of waking hours) by age 3 years, indicating that many children who use CIs are not receiving sufficient auditory access to drive emergent literacy development (Walker et al, 2019). Rather, children who use CIs are likely to require specialized intervention in both vocabulary and morphosyntax to promote academic success (Lonigan and Shanahan, 2010).…”